Optimal Spatial Configuration for Energy and Solar Use in Alpine-Frigid Resettlement Communities

Abstract

Resettlement communities in Qinghai are located in cold, high-altitude regions with dry climates and strong solar radiation. Although not extremely cold, the moderate heating demand aligns well with high solar availability, making passive design highly effective for reducing energy use. This study investigates solar-optimized spatial configurations that enhance passive energy performance while addressing functional settlement needs. Through parametric modeling and climate-responsive simulations, four key spatial parameters are examined: building spacing, courtyard depth, density, and volumetric ratio. The findings highlight the dominant role of front–rear spacing in solar access, with optimal values at 3–4 m for single-story and 5–10 m for two-story buildings, balancing radiation gain and land use efficiency. Courtyard depths under 2.7 m significantly limit south façade exposure due to shading from the opposite courtyard wall under low-angle winter sun. This reduction results in the south façade attaining only 55.7–79.6% of the solar radiation acquisition by an unobstructed south façade (the baseline). Meanwhile, clustered orientations reduce inter-building shading losses by 38–42% compared to dispersed layouts. A three-tiered design framework is proposed: (1) macro-scale solar orientation zoning, (2) meso-scale spacing tailored to building height, and (3) micro-scale courtyard modulation for low-angle winter radiation. Together, these strategies provide practical, scalable guidelines for energy-efficient, climate-responsive settlement design in the alpine regions of Qinghai.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

As pivotal hubs for hydropower development in China, Qinghai hosts a significant number of resettlement communities for hydropower project migrants. These projects must pursue sustainable pathways within fragile, high-altitude arid ecosystems [1]. The region exhibits a distinctive “high solar radiation–moderate-to-low heating energy consumption (HEC)” profile: The combination of intense solar exposure and drastic diurnal/seasonal temperature fluctuations creates exceptional potential for passive solar design—abundant solar resources align well with relatively modest heating demands in timing and intensity. Nevertheless, winters impose substantial heating loads, posing critical challenges for settlement planning.

While significant progress has been made in building energy efficiency research for cold high-altitude regions, a scale-related limitation persists, as existing studies predominantly concentrate on optimizing materials, building envelopes, and active technologies at the individual building level. Research on how community-scale spatial configurations systematically influence solar radiation acquisition and HEC remains underexplored. This gap similarly exists in the standardized planning protocols for resettlement communities, which often fail to adequately incorporate site-specific solar accessibility analysis and its spatial variation across building clusters, leading to suboptimal daylight utilization.

Spatial morphological parameters constitute fundamental variables governing solar radiation acquisition. They directly determine effective solar irradiance on building surfaces, shadowing effects, passive heat gain potential, and heat loss rates, thereby critically impacting HEC and overall energy performance. Despite recognition of their importance, the specific quantitative mechanisms through which village-scale spatial morphology regulates the complete “solar gain–heat loss” chain and ultimately governs community-level HEC require systematic investigation and quantification.

Consequently, this study focuses on hydropower resettlement communities and similar alpine villages in Qinghai. It aims to elucidate the integrated regulatory mechanisms by which village spatial form parameters affect solar radiation acquisition efficiency and heat loss. By exploring optimized spatial arrangements, the research pursues the dual goals of enhancing solar gain and reducing heat loss. The findings provide evidence-based design guidelines and technical support for developing energy-efficient settlements in high-altitude cold regions.

1.2. Literature Review

The interplay between urban morphology and solar radiation accessibility has garnered significant scholarly attention in recent years. Liu et al. [2] systematically reviewed 258 studies (2011–2022) to evaluate 111 urban form indicators, revealing that building density (BD) (total building footprint area/site area) and floor area ratio (FAR) (total floor area/site area) exhibit negative correlations with solar radiation acquisition, whereas building height and window-to-wall ratio demonstrate positive associations. Their analysis emphasized boundary condition dependencies and identified substitutive relationships among specific morphological metrics, providing a theoretical foundation for future urban energy modeling. Addressing latitude-specific challenges, Xiao et al. [3] developed a predictive model integrating building morphology parameters with latitude cosine values, achieving high accuracy in estimating residential block solar radiation (adjusted R²: 0.931 for roofs, 0.962 for façades), thereby offering a versatile tool for multi-climate applications.

Manni et al. [4] developed a solar potential mapping framework tailored for high-latitude winter conditions with low irradiance in Trondheim, Norway, by integrating LiDAR-derived 3D models with radiation simulations. Freitas et al. [5] systematically analyzed the impact mechanisms of vertical expansion and dynamic shading effects on solar potential assessment, revealing methodological trade-offs inherent in relevant digital tools. Gan et al. [6] employed a simulation-based genetic algorithm to optimize Hong Kong high-rise residential layouts, achieving 30–40% reductions in air conditioning and lighting energy by maximizing natural ventilation and daylight.

He et al. [7] simulated 384 Hong Kong cases, showing that building height heterogeneity reduces net carbon emissions by minimizing shading, while shape heterogeneity (footprint aspect ratio/surface-to-volume ratio) increases energy penalties despite enhanced facade solar gains. Dino et al. [8] developed the multi-objective tool MADE. It uses a two-step genetic algorithm—first resolving spatial layout constraints, then co-optimizing energy and daylighting—to generate Pareto-optimal building designs, validated via a library case study. Hachem-Vermette et al. [9] found that in their Calgary prototypes, optimized orientations resulted in less than 3% solar access variation across layouts. However, hexagonal networks outperformed rectangular configurations on resilience metrics. Asfour et al. [10] confirmed that horizontally compact layouts in tropical regions achieve 28% greater energy savings compared to vertical forms. Kosir et al. [11] analyzed seven typical Slovenian urban layouts, revealing that solar potential constraints are less severe than expected, with building form/orientation posing the primary challenge.

Deng et al. [12] verified in Harbin that courtyard layouts optimized for spacing and orientation can yield 4~5% energy savings. Xu et al. [13] proposed an evaluation workflow for Wuhan office blocks. It revealed that combined morphological parameters significantly impact energy use intensity (cooling: 28.83%, heating: 28.56%, lighting: 23.23%), identifying building shape factor and FAR as dominant factors. Ahmed et al. [14] utilized building performance simulation to drive a 51.3% energy reduction target for Saudi residential buildings. Yan et al. [15] proposed using solar radiation intensity as a quantitative shading indicator in hot summer/cold winter zones. Optimizing residential cluster layouts achieved 4.39% cooling and 4.03% HEC reductions at the cluster scale. Narimani Abar et al. [16] identified 10 urban morphological variables influencing residential energy consumption. Their predictive model (~80% accuracy) resolved controversies regarding density’s impact: density correlates negatively with energy use in cold climates but potentially positively in temperate zones, contingent upon climate, energy type, and research methodology. A GIS-based urban-scale building energy modeling tool that automates building stock performance assessment, defines energy efficiency measures, introduces an urban building energy rating, and was validated on 769 Italian residential buildings was presented by de Rubeis et al. [17]. Du et al. [18] developed a computational method for optimizing office building space layouts to enhance energy efficiency, identifying the facade-to-FAR as the most influential design indicator; their layout optimization demonstrates potential reductions of up to 54% in lighting, heating, and cooling demands. Zhu et al. [19] investigated the dual impact of urban morphology on building energy consumption and outdoor thermal comfort (UTCI) in hot–humid climates. Simulations of six block layouts reveal that parameters like FAR and plan dimensions universally influence performance, while surface-to-volume ratio (S/V) and sky view factor (SVF) exhibit sensitivities dependent on specific layout configurations.

Hadavi et al. [20] demonstrated, in their Tehran-based study, that reduced urban compactness lowers urban heat island (UHI) intensity and saves 16.4% energy through thermal wake evacuation, while rooftop units experience overheating due to 50K surface-window temperature gaps. Wu et al. [21] quantified the dual impact of urban morphology on building energy consumption and renewable energy potential at the neighborhood scale in Beijing. They revealed the interplay between the UHI effect (reducing heating energy by 15.8% but increasing cooling energy by 30%) and building shading effects (increasing heating energy by 11.88% but decreasing cooling energy by 5.87%), providing morphological parameters for precise renewable energy allocation.

Hong et al. [22], through numerical simulations, show that building layouts with long facades parallel to prevailing winds accelerate horizontal vortices, improving pedestrian-level thermal comfort. Furthermore, configurations featuring central squares oriented towards the wind direction, combined with strategic tree placement, optimize the microclimate by reducing standard effective temperature (SET) values. Yan et al. [23] addressed the severe 6.5% annual increase in building energy consumption in hot summer/cold winter zones. By quantifying the impact of residential cluster layouts on energy and carbon emissions using an effective shading coefficient, they revealed optimization paths; staggered layouts reduce cooling energy by 7.17%, and enclosed layouts reduce heating energy by 4.06%, offering key emission reduction strategies for high-growth regions.

Lu et al. [24] identified three high-rise residential layout patterns in Northeast China via SPSS (SPSS version 29) multivariate response analysis. Combined with Ecotect radiation simulations, they revealed that three-sided enclosed layouts offer optimal solar potential, with specific nonlinear relationships between FAR, BD, height, and radiation, providing quantitative guidelines for high-density solar optimization.

Singh et al. [25] proposed a three-step workflow for community-scale net-zero energy retrofits in Canada; envelope upgrades can reduce energy use by 60%. The optimal combination of solar strategies is highly dependent on community type and street layout, providing a systematic decision-making tool for climate-adaptive community planning. Sosa et al. [26] addressed social housing communities in arid regions. Microclimate simulations revealed that optimizing street layout/orientation combined with street trees + high-albedo materials can reduce summer cooling energy consumption by over 21%, providing a thermal environment regulation paradigm for high-temperature urban communities. Huo et al. [27] utilized remote sensing and mesoscale modeling to track Xi’an’s urban structure, finding that its evolution towards taller, less dense buildings correlated with reduced heat stress.

1.3. Research Gap and Contribution

While robust linkages between urban morphology, energy efficiency, and solar potential are established across diverse climates, high-altitude resettlement communities—characterized by prevailing single-/double-story dwellings—remain under-investigated. Critical unmet needs include: (1) layout optimization for dominant low-rise typologies, (2) collective shading dynamics in clustered developments, (3) cold-climate solar strategies for courtyards and walls, and (4) integrated frameworks balancing solar gain with land-use efficiency.

Theoretically, this study advances bioclimatic design theory through quantification of cluster morphology impacts on solar radiation acquisition and HEC in alpine settlements. Mechanistic insights into building energy flow modulation by collective shading are revealed via integration of radiative heat transfer dynamics with spatial parameter analysis, extending climate-responsive principles to address spatial energy interdependencies in vulnerable resettlement contexts.

Practically, transferable protocols are developed, including cluster-scale spatial standards enabling low-carbon settlement design and passive heating strategies tailored to cold regions. Evidence-based tools are thereby yielded that harmonize energy efficiency with ecological preservation in high-altitude development.

1.4. Research Purpose

The dual dimensions of building cluster spatial morphology—exterior surface solar radiation acquisition and building HEC—are investigated in hydropower resettlement communities across cold high-altitude regions. Critical morphological parameters (orientation, density, courtyard design) are quantitatively analyzed to develop climate-responsive strategies that concurrently maximize passive solar radiation acquisition and minimize HEC. Significant reductions in HEC are targeted through this integrated framework, while thermal comfort improvements are enhanced. Actionable guidelines for sustainable settlement planning in high-altitude and cold environments are thereby formulated.

2. Methodology

2.1. Research Path and Method

A combined methodology of parametric simulation and quantitative trend analysis is employed to systematically examine the coupling mechanisms between spatial morphology, exterior surface solar radiation acquisition, and building HEC in resettlement communities across Qinghai. Georeferenced 3D parametric models are developed in Rhino 8 using field-surveyed data, with core morphological variables—building spacing, orientation, courtyard configuration, and density—explicitly defined. Plateau-specific meteorological data are integrated to drive simulations.

Climate-responsive workflows are implemented through Ladybug Tools 1.8.0 coupled with EnergyPlus 25.1.0. Exterior surface solar radiation acquisition and HEC are quantified across morphological scenarios. The controlled variable method is applied to analyze impact trends of individual parameters. Characteristic features of parameter-performance curves (e.g., growth inflection points, fluctuation thresholds) and performance variation magnitudes are observed to determine directional influences and effect intensities of morphological elements. Spatial design guidelines prioritizing key interventions are subsequently distilled for enhanced solar radiation acquisition.

This integrated modeling-simulation-trend analysis framework establishes explicit correlations between cold-region settlement morphology and energy performance, providing theoretical foundations for high-altitude habitat planning.

2.2. Variable Identification

The methodology systematically defines morphological drivers and energy response indicators to precisely examine spatial energy interactions. Four core layout parameters are established as independent variables: building spacing (front–rear and side distances, simulated range: 0 m–20 m), courtyard depth (radiative accessibility, simulated range: 0.9 m–6 m), BD (footprint ratio, controlled by building spacing), and FAR (spatial compactness, controlled by building spacing and number of stories). Dependent variables quantify radiation performance (annual cumulative surface irradiation) and thermal demand (heating load intensity). Building height, orientation, and simplified rectangular morphology are standardized as fixed parameters, while meteorological inputs are anchored to the calibrated EnergyPlus Weather Data for Xining, Qinghai (https://energyplus.net/weather, (accessed on 5 May 2025)). This controlled parameter system enables precise analysis of morphology–energy pathways in alpine environments.

2.3. Sample and Data Sources

An idealized prototype model is developed based on typical resettlement patterns, with real-world complexity abstracted into parametric spatial grids. Critically, this methodological approach aligns with the standard [28], wherein prescribed regional heating energy limits are derived from identical idealized simulations, confirming the validity of our abstraction framework. Orthogonal building volumes with uniform height and north–south orientation eliminate geometric interference, while thermal parameters are rigorously set according to standard [28,29]. The computational workflow is fully automated within the Rhinoceros-Grasshopper environment through embedded physics engines (Ladybug/Honeybee), eliminating manual formula implementation, as follows:

• Solar flux mapping: Hourly irradiation simulations generate surface radiation heat flux profiles.
• Thermal load calculation: Steady-state heat transfer models quantify envelope heat loss.
• Performance benchmarking: Energy efficiency differentials are assessed against baseline scenarios.

This abstraction strategy focuses on spatial parameter interactions to enhance analytical resolution, generating transferable planning principles for cold arid settlements. Modular technical architecture maintains computational feasibility while enabling seamless scalability to practical resettlement projects.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Climatic Context

Qinghai demonstrates a stark bioclimatic duality defined by the coexistence of intense solar radiation and prolonged high-altitude cold arid conditions. Marked seasonal temperature extremes prevail, featuring extended sub-zero winters contrasting with dramatic daily summer temperature fluctuations in southern regions. Chronically low humidity significantly intensifies radiative cooling effects throughout the province.

This paradox necessitates dual energy strategies: severe heating demands are counterbalanced by exceptional solar abundance, positioning passive solar optimization as critical for sustainable settlements. Altitude-modulated climates impose non-negotiable design imperatives—maximization of radiative heat gain during extended winters must be systematically reconciled with mitigation of seasonal overheating risks. Such contradictory requirements fundamentally redefine spatial planning protocols for resettlement communities across energy-critical high-altitude zones.

3.2. Validation Protocol

Validation benchmarks were established using a simplified rectangular prototype (Figure 1) calibrated to Qinghai’s construction standards. The 2:1 plan ratio reflects prevalent geometries in surveyed settlements, and the absence of north fenestration is inherent to the single-room abstraction where south-oriented windows suffice for daylighting. Window thermal parameters were optimized through U-value/SHGC adjustments for alpine radiative balance. Simulated heating loads aligned with standards [28,29] within 2% error, confirming model fidelity in altitude-specific heat transfer analysis.

3.3. Impacts of Building Spacing on Solar Radiation Acquisition and Heating Energy Consumption

This study evaluates shading effects by comparing radiation values of obstructed configurations against an unobstructed baseline (Figure 2 and Figure 3). Simulations reveal a nonlinear inverse correlation between building spacing and radiation loss, where shading impact becomes negligible once spacing exceeds a critical threshold. North–south building rows require larger spacing than east–west orientations to mitigate shading.

Thermal analysis demonstrates that terraced layouts reduce heating demand by 18% (single-layer), 24% (double-layer), and 15% (mixed-layer) compared to detached layouts through minimized external surface exposure (Figure 3), confirming their efficacy in balancing energy efficiency and solar utilization. Front–back spacing optimization shows diminishing thermal returns beyond 5 m (uniform height units) and 10 m (hybrid configurations)—thresholds consistent with observed radiation equilibria (

Table 1. Critical building spacing at curve leveling-off point of solar radiation reduction rate under different boundary conditions.

Condition	Critical Building Pacing at Leveling-Off Point
Single story, left–right arrangement	5 m
Single story, front–back arrangement	5 m
Double story, left–right arrangement	5 m
Double story, front–back arrangement	10 m
Single + double story, left–right (left high)	5 m
Single + double story, left–right (left low)	5 m
Single + double story, front–back (front high, back low)	10 m
Single story, left–right arrangement	5 m

).

3.4. Impacts of Building Orientation on Solar Radiation Acquisition and Heating Energy Consumption

A significant directional effect was revealed through the establishment of rotational scenarios for both individual buildings and building clusters (Figure 4). At the individual building scale, maximum solar radiation acquisition was achieved at a 10° west-of-south orientation, whereas the minimum HEC was observed at 60° east-of-south. A 5% differential in HEC was recorded between these orientations during the heating season, indicating that angular deviation from the 10° west-of-south orientation should be minimized.

For building clusters, due south alignment was found to maximize mutual shading reduction, establishing it as the optimal village layout pattern. By contrast, a 50° east-of-south cluster orientation resulted in approximately 5% higher energy loads. This discrepancy necessitates differentiated design strategies: the 10° west-of-south orientation is prioritized for individual structures to enhance solar capture efficiency, while due south alignment is maintained for building groups to optimize collective radiation efficiency.

The thermal performance analysis (Figure 5) reveals the distinct optimization strategies required for building orientation at different spatial scales. For individual buildings, the optimal orientation is 20° east of south, which maximizes morning solar radiation acquisition and reduces HEC. In contrast, building clusters perform best when oriented 40° east of south, a direction that balances solar radiation distribution within the cluster and minimizes mutual shading between buildings to achieve peak efficiency.

Accordingly, the design guidelines recommend orientation ranges that consider both solar optimization and layout flexibility: from 50° east of south to 40° west of south for individual buildings, and from 60° east of south to 60° west of south for building clusters. These threshold ranges not only help accommodate future climate variability but also effectively mitigate the negative impacts of shading within clusters.

The findings establish a scale-sensitive design paradigm; while individual buildings require precise orientation tuning to optimize solar gain, building clusters must seek radiation synergy within a broader angular tolerance. This dual-strategy framework significantly enhances the environmental adaptability of resettlement housing projects, systematically reduces HEC, and strongly supports regional goals for sustainable development in the building energy sector.

3.5. Impact of Courtyard Depth on Solar Radiation Acquisition and Heating Energy Consumption

This study evaluates the shading effects of courtyards using 2 m high walls with depths ranging from 0.9 m to 6 m (Figure 6). The solar accessibility of the south façade shows a nonlinear negative correlation with courtyard depth, using the unobstructed condition (100% exposure) as a reference. Within the 1–3 m depth range, solar radiation acquisition fluctuates between 55.7% and 79.6%, reflecting significant shading effects. Beyond 3 m, the attenuation rate decreases notably, stabilizing around 86.6% at a depth of 4.8 m, indicating that persistent east–west wall shadows during low solar angles hinder full radiation recovery (Figure 7 and Figure 8).

The results identify three operational zones:

• High-sensitivity zone (0.9–3 m): Approximately 12% reduction in irradiance for every additional meter in depth.
• Transition zone (3–4.8 m): Marginal losses dominate, with irradiance loss per meter falling below 4%.
• Stabilization threshold (>4.8 m): A residual 13.4% reduction in irradiance persists due to lateral obstructions.

These nonlinear dynamics necessitate depth-specific design protocols, as follows: for solar-critical applications, courtyard depths should be kept below 3 m; beyond 4.8 m, greater flexibility is allowed due to the diminished impact of shading.

Using the HEC under unobstructed exposure as the baseline (100%), the modulation effect of courtyard configurations (Figure 9) on building thermal load exhibits a clear depth dependency (Figure 10). Within the tested depth range (0.9 m to 6 m), HEC fluctuates between 78.3% and 95.1% of the baseline, revealing a critical nonlinear dynamic.

When courtyard depth is less than 2.7 m, HEC increases sharply with depth—by as much as 16.8%—due to significant obstruction of solar gain on the south façade, particularly during periods of low winter radiation. However, beyond 2.7 m, the sensitivity of thermal load-to-depth decreases markedly; between 2.7 m and 6 m, HEC shows only a marginal change of 3.2%. This suggests that during low solar altitude periods, the shading effect of east–west courtyard walls reaches a saturation point, beyond which, additional depth does not substantially increase HEC.

Based on this threshold, the study proposes targeted design principles, as follows: courtyard depth should be kept within 2.7 m to minimize winter heating losses; for depths greater than 2.7 m, more spatial flexibility can be allowed without significantly compromising thermal performance.

3.6. Impact of Building Density and Floor Area Ratio on Solar Radiation Acquisition and Heating Energy Consumption

When investigating the impact of BD and FAR on solar radiation acquisition and HEC, this study systematically adjusted building spacing and single- or double-story configurations within fixed site boundary conditions to vary density and FAR parameters (Figure 11). For single-story building units (Figure 12 and Figure 13), the influence of north–south (front-to-back) spacing on solar radiation was more than twice as strong as that of east–west (lateral) spacing. Based on a 2% irradiance variance threshold, the optimal spacing ranges were identified as 1–1.5 m east–west and 3–4 m north–south.

For double-story building structures (Figure 14 and Figure 15), the increased vertical surface area exposed to sunlight required significantly larger spacing—expanded to 3–5 m east–west and extended to 5–10 m north–south—to ensure adequate solar exposure on higher façades. This hierarchical spacing strategy provides a quantitative design basis to balance development intensity with solar energy utilization efficiency.

The thermal analysis (Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18 and Figure 19) confirmed the dominant role of front-to-back spacing in energy regulation, with HEC stabilizing beyond 5 m for single-story buildings and 10 m for two-story buildings. The optimal spacing thresholds for energy efficiency—3–5 m for single-story and 5.5–10 m for two-story structures—balance radiation efficiency and land-use intensity, achieving an 18–22% reduction in HEC while maintaining 85–90% solar energy utilization.

These findings establish a differentiated planning framework based on building height; low-rise structures adopt a compact east–west spacing layout, while multi-story configurations require expanded north–south spacing.

4. Conclusions

This study took Qinghai as an example to systematically analyze the influence mechanisms of spatial structure on solar radiation acquisition and building HEC in high-altitude cold region resettlement communities.

Building spacing is a key factor regulating solar radiation acquisition and HEC; the impact of north–south spacing is significantly greater than that of east–west spacing, with improvements in solar radiation acquisition and HEC stabilizing beyond 5 m for single-story and 10 m for two-story buildings. Optimal spacing thresholds were derived from simulations as follows: for single-story buildings, 3–4 m north–south and 1–1.5 m east–west; for two-story buildings, 5–10 m north–south and 3–5 m east–west. Terraced layouts minimize exposed surfaces and can significantly reduce HEC.

Orientation optimization exhibits scale-dependent characteristics; individual buildings achieve peak solar gain at 10° west of south, while settlement clusters perform best with a due south orientation to reduce mutual shading. Recommended energy-efficient orientation sectors are from 50° east of south to 40° west of south for individual buildings, and from 60° east of south to 60° west of south for settlement planning, balancing radiation efficiency and spatial adaptability.

Courtyard depth induces nonlinear radiation responses; depths below 3 m form a high-sensitivity zone (radiation recovery rate between 55.7% and 79.6%), while depths beyond 4.8 m enter a stable zone (maintaining about 86.6% of the baseline). Thermal performance analysis further confirms 2.7 m as a critical depth threshold for minimizing heating losses.

Based on these findings, the study proposes an integrated “Orientation–Spacing–Depth” hierarchical design framework prioritizing south-facing façades, adapting spacing thresholds to building height, and modulating courtyard scale functionally. This climate-responsive blueprint demonstrates transfer potential to regions sharing Qinghai’s high-altitude cold arid characteristics—specifically, those with comparable solar radiation regimes, heating-dominated energy profiles, and low-rise clustered morphologies.

5. Limitations and Prospects

This study intentionally focuses on single-variable mechanisms through idealized scenarios, thereby excluding multi-variable synergies, socioeconomic trade-offs, and dynamic complexities. Three primary technical constraints warrant attention in broader applications, as follows: radiation thresholds require latitude-specific adjustments; courtyard depth effects may reverse in high-humidity cold climates; and spacing optima assume homogeneous building heights. Critically, while our morphology–energy guidelines establish preventive design thresholds for early planning phases, their economic viability necessitates future region-specific techno-economic verification, a prerequisite for sustainable implementation. Subsequent research must develop integrated frameworks coupling environmental objectives with socioeconomic factors, enabling empirical validation across diverse high-altitude contexts to bridge theoretical insights and community-scaled practices.