DonnerReport120520 by Eleni Katrini

CBP&D

48-723 Performance of Advanced Building Systems Carnegie Mellon University

Integrated Systems Approach for Improved Energy Performance Human Comfort and Campus Quality Comparing Extension and RetroďŹ t Opportunities at Donner House Dormitory Carnegie Mellon University Campus

Prepared by Freddie Croce, Eleni Katrini, Kristen Magnuson and Shalini Ramesh

2012

CBP&D

Table of Contents

2012

Introduction .............................................................................................

Approach to Decision Making ...............................................................

Integration ...............................................................................................

Energy Performance ..............................................................................

Donner House .......................................................................................................... 2 Physical Building: ................................................................................................ 3 Resident Perception: ........................................................................................... 6 Needed Upgrades and Renovations ........................................................................ 9 Opportunities ............................................................................................................ 10 Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 13 Beneﬁts of Green Building on Carnegie Mellon’s Campus: ................................ 14 Best Practices: .................................................................................................... 14 Passive House: ................................................................................................... 15 Method ..................................................................................................................... 16 Descriptive Pro-Forma ............................................................................................. 17 Products, Integration and Value .............................................................................. 20 Façade: ............................................................................................................... 22 Foundation: ......................................................................................................... 20 Structure: ............................................................................................................. 21 Roof - the Fifth Facade: ....................................................................................... 39 Green House: ...................................................................................................... 42 Interior: ................................................................................................................ 48 MEP: .................................................................................................................... 52 Overview .................................................................................................................. 53 Simulation Parameters ............................................................................................. 54 Weather Data: .................................................................................................... 54 Building Envelope: .............................................................................................. 55 Lighting Power Density: ...................................................................................... 55 Equipment Power Density: ................................................................................. 55 HVAC Systems: .................................................................................................. 57 Window to Wall Ratio: ........................................................................................ 57 Building Area: ..................................................................................................... 58 Glazing Properties: ............................................................................................. 58 Occupant Density and Schedules: ..................................................................... 59 Simulation Results ................................................................................................... 61

CBP&D

Table of Contents

2012

Viability ....................................................................................................

Summary .................................................................................................

References .............................................................................................. Appendix .................................................................................................

73 76

Development Costs .................................................................................................. 66 Assets and Equity .................................................................................................... 69 Existing Building: ................................................................................................. 69 Products: ............................................................................................................. 70 Capital: ................................................................................................................ 70 Design and Research Services: .......................................................................... 70 Revenue .................................................................................................................. 71 University: ........................................................................................................... 71 Gifts and Donations: ........................................................................................... 71 Government Incentives: ...................................................................................... 71 Financing: ............................................................................................................ 71 Income and Cash Flow: ...................................................................................... 71 Expense ................................................................................................................... 71 Operation (Maintenance): ................................................................................... 71 Administrative: ..................................................................................................... 71 Value ........................................................................................................................ 71 Building: .............................................................................................................. 71 Campus: .............................................................................................................. 71 Regional: ............................................................................................................. 71 Integration and Performance ................................................................................... 72 Design ..................................................................................................................... 72 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 72

CBP&D

Introduction

2012

Carnegie Mellon University is known for its innovation, cutting edge technology and collaborative thinking in the ﬁelds of computer science, robotics, engineering and architecture. The research and products developed at this institution stand as models for private and public realms around the globe. The information and equipment employed on its campuses and what comes out of the university is extraordinary and exceptional. But curiously this vast wealth of knowledge and inspiration is housed in buildings - some over 110 years old - that typically proclaim a pedestrian past rather than an inspiring future. Similarly, buildings erected on campus within the past several years, have attracted critical acclaim more for aesthetic achievement rather than the technical and innovative rigor that is most associated with the institution.

Figure 1 - Intelliegent Workplace atop Margret Morison - Left. Collge of Fine Arts - Right.

This is not to suggest that the past must be dismissed or that the campus should be razed and be rebuilt in the image of the 21st century. It is merely to suggest that for an institution that is renowned for it’s cutting edge technology, any renovation or new building that does not consider current best practices in the building industry in conjunction with a collaborative integrative systems design approach would be disingenuous if not blatantly hypocritical. There is currently one portion of a building, the Intelligent Workplace atop Margret Morrison, that demonstrates the cutting edge of building technology of its time and that addition is nearly 20 years old. There may not be many opportunities in the near future for a new building to be constructed in the center of campus, but there are currently several buildings on campus in need of repair or renovation and one in particular that is a prime opportunity to showcase the breadth of architectural knowledge that CMU offers and to bear the standard of state-of-the-art building technology. Donner House, a dormitory in much need of an update and situated on an advantageous site on campus has a chance to demonstrate that systems integration and a truly collaborative design effort can produce an advanced building that can best achieve the goals of energy efﬁciency, human comfort and ﬁnancial acumen worthy of the university.

CBP&D

Donner House A residence hall that currently houses 232 student residents and 10 residence life staff members, Donner House is seen at once as a highly popular building and as a blot on the east campus. There have been several studies regarding potential upgrades and renovation strategies for Donner House to improve comfort for its residents and to reduce the building’s energy consumption. Most recently “A Strategic Opportunity for the Renovation of the Donner House Dormitory at Carnegie Mellon University,” conducted by the Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University in May of 2011 analyzed, comfort, thermal, ventilation, visual, lighting and energy performance, focusing primarily on the façade as a major inﬂuence. The building is well described in this study illustrating both its good and bad aspects and concluding that improvements to the building’s façade would positively impact the overall performance of the building. After review of this document and discussions with Housing Services (HS) and Facilities Management Services (FMS) it is clear that the building needs to be upgraded and that the upgrades should address energy consumption reduction, improved thermal, visual, acoustical and spatial quality, as well as improved indoor air quality.

Introduction

2012

Figure 2 - Site Context - Donner House

The façade is a good example of what is commonly referred to as 1960s architecture, although it was actually built in 1954. The integrity of the aluminum façade although sound is stained and streaked, the blue tinted glass exuding a dated feel to the building that adds little to the thermal or visual quality of the spaces inside. The thermally inefﬁcient façade is comprised of un-insulated metal panels over concrete masonry units (cmu) with a single pane aluminum 2

CBP&D

framed window system. There is no central air-conditioning (A/C) and no mechanical ventilation provided, except within the bathroom and locker facilities. The concrete ﬂoor slabs and concrete encased steel structural system add welcomed mass to the building but are clearly under utilized.

Introduction

2012

Physical Building:

Donner House has five levels and is essentially a bar shaped building. It is off-set at its middle with an extended common area at the south east entrance. Two levels are semi-exposed leaving the profile of the building three stories high at the street side. In this manner the scale is modest and is certainly not overwhelming in its mass. It is dwarfed by Reznik Hall to the north and Margret Morrison to its west. There is currently gross 63,127 square feet (5864 square meters). With a room area efficiency of 46% there is just over 29,000 square feet of room area (2,724 square meters). A typical room, which houses two students, has net dimensions of approximately 13 feet by 13 feet (3.96 meters x 3.96 meters) or 238 square feet (22 square meters). Bedrooms are equitably arranged on all floors (except level B – which is the lowest level and houses locker rooms and mechanical equipment) with common bathrooms located towards the center of the building. Hallways are typically 6 feet wide (1.82 meters) with stairwells at either end plus a central stairway. There is 41,448 square feet (3,851 square meters) of façade area and coupled with 13, 875 square feet (1,289 square meters) of roof area exposes 55,323 square feet (5,139 square meters) of building envelope. The envelope obviously has the greatest visual impact but is also, as previous studies have shown, a significant factor in the building’s energy performance. The roof is relatively flat with no parapet (just a small 6 inch (15.24 cm) curb at the perimeter) free of mechanical equipment and penetrations, which would allow flexibility when considering expansion or addition opportunities. The window to wall ratio of the aluminum façade is 47% providing 437 windows aggregating 20,426 square feet (1,898 square meters) of window area and 10,812 square feet (1,004 square meters) of wall area which is comprised of a metal panel over a cmu wall providing little thermal resistance and is the leading culprit in excessive solar heat gain and thermal heat loss in the building. The façade also is also a significant building component contributing to student dissatisfaction in the dormitory. Compounding the matter, the response to this poorly performing façade is an inefficient and poorly thought-out radiator heating system.

CBP&D

Introduction

2012

Figure 3 - South east Façade

��

�

��

� � � � � � � � � � � � �

� � � � � � � � ��

��

� ��

��

CBP&D

� � � ��

� � � � ��

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

� � �� Location: �� Latitude: �� Longitude: �� Orientation: ��

� � � �

� � � � ��

�

��

Introduction

2012

� ��

�

��

�� Pittsburgh, PA �� 40.35˚ �� -79.92˚ �� N 20˚ W �� (Long Axis) ��

��

CBP&D

2012

Introduction

Resident Perception:

As part of the Building Controls and Diagnostics course, the graduate class of Spring 2012 conducted a thorough study of Donner House existing conditions. The study was conducted using the NEAT (National Environmental Assessment Toolkit) cart by the students. The study focused on collecting data on thermal, spatial, HVAC and acoustic quality in the building. In addition to measuring the quantitative data using the NEAT cart, four students from each ﬂoor were asked to ﬁll an iPad survey with regard to their working conditions in Donner House. The results of the study are summarized below in the form of analysis charts.

Figure 4 - Typical Rooms

1. Spatial Quality: From the analysis of spatial quality satisfaction rates provided by the students in the form of a survey, we see that the most unsatisfactory condition is the degree of enclosure of the work area by walls, screens or furniture and privacy in terms of distance between the beds and

��

�

CBP&D

the workspaces. Therefore, issues of spatial quality can be addressed by efﬁciently designing the room with bunk beds which provides room for storage and other furniture and increasing the aesthetic appeal of the spaces by incorporating indoor plants and renovating the exterior façade. 2. Lighting quality: The lighting system in the Donner House is relatively below the IESNA standards, with an average illuminance of 155lux when 200lux is the recommended illuminance by IESNA for the desk space in an educational facility. In addition to this, the daylight conditions are not adequate either due to the low transmission of light through the windows and no glare control. Due � to this low light transmission and high glare, there is high use of artiﬁcial lighting in the dormitory rooms.

Introduction

2012

��

�

��

� ��

��

�

This � is further enhanced by the Cost-effective Open-plan Environment (COPE) User satisfaction survey which indicates that only 42% show satisfaction with the quality of lighting in the work space and a similar satisfaction rate for access to a view when they are seated. As a recommendation, light levels must be improved to provide the minimum standard 7

CBP&D

recommended by the IESNA. Also the new façade system in terms of shading devices and high light transmittance glass is required to reduce the glare in the work space which in turn provides views and adequate daylight. 3. HVAC/Thermal quality: The most significant findings with regard to the thermal quality in Donner House is the poor thermal conditions in the building due to lack of ventilation and cooling. From the COPE User satisfaction questionnaire, it is understood that the occupants are highly unsatisfied with the indoor air quality and recommendations have been provided to improve the façade system and the HVAC system to address these issues. 4. Acoustic quality: General sources of the background noise are noise from people walking on the side walk or the playground outside Donner House, noise from residents walking in the corridors, laundry room noise, heating fan noise, hydraulic heating radiator noise and computer fan noise. In order to address the acoustic quality, measures like carpet installation, insulation in doors and windows, and noise absorption ceiling panels can be installed to improve the acoustic quality within the building.

Introduction

2012

CBP&D

Needed Upgrades and Renovations Donner House is 58 years old. There has been no substantial renovation or upgrade to the building in its lifetime and the building technology is outdated and ineffectual. From a physical standpoint the building is overdue for a facelift. From a HS and FMS standpoint, however, the dormitory is a money generator, as boarding fee income far outpaces maintenance costs. Nevertheless, it must be explicitly clear and stipulated that there is a need for improvements: only then can the extent of improvements be addressed. As substantiated by the CMU study mentioned earlier, the façade is certainly one of the systems that should be upgraded and is

Introduction

2012

Figure 5 - Donner with extended ﬂoor plates and two aditional ﬂoors

just one component of a whole building envelope that must be included as part of an integral approach. Other improvements such as the mechanical (or lack of parts thereof), water management, operational and monitoring systems must also be folded into the mix. In a typical discussion regarding renovation, the systems just mentioned would constitute the bulk and extent of the systems investigated. But if one were to frame the question another way and look at the building’s improvement needs as a developer might, the scope of systems opportunities might broaden. It may be advantageous or necessary to increase the scope of the project in order to bring generated income and revenue in balance with expenditures. Interdependence of physical systems may be tied with interdependent ﬁnancial systems. As an example, and we shall go into greater depth later, if photovoltaic (PV) solar panels were donated to the project as a demonstration investment by the manufacturer and a centrifugal chiller

CBP&D

cooling system which can be driven by the electricity generated by the PV array, then the cost to cool the building may be simply the cost of the cooling equipment, reducing the operational costs to near zero. This approach coupled with a decreased percentage of initial investment (as total budget increases) would provide desperately needed cooling and an increased mechanism for ventilation for the relatively low cost of only the cooling equipment. Another scenario would be to increase floor area so that the increased revenue could be used to justify state of the art technology costs as a smaller percentage of the overall budget while keeping the project financially feasible. It is sometimes necessary to increase the scope of a project to increase the value in relation to investment for a development. In this sense a minimum overall budget is not the end goal – value is. Unit costs will assuredly decrease with increased scope but value and benefit may not be achievable at lower overall costs. It is this type of ability to investigate movement beyond the cost barrier of a fixed budget that reveals opportunities which could potentially reduce overall budget costs even further. Donner House has many negotiating assets available to make the project viable. Some are easily identifiable while some are less obvious. Below we shall look at some opportunities to be leveraged.

Introduction

2012

Opportunities In the public realm, as is on campus, repairs, replacements and even renovations tend to be undertaken as the need arises and most often address only the immediate needs. There are certainly some improvements to Donner House that will be required and the necessity to replace, upgrade or add to the existing building should not be viewed solely as a “ﬁx.” There are plenty of opportunities and favorable connections to exploit, to not only improve upon the current comfort and health of the residents but to elevate Donner House as a state of the art dormitory. Location, location and location, as the mantra goes, are the three most important factors in real estate development. Donner House is touted as having the best location of the dormitories in the university’s system. It sits just inside the ring road that surrounds the campus to the east and south posing prominently at the bend in the road. It represents one of the ﬁrst glimpses of the campus from the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh along Margaret Morrison Street. Donner House is close and convenient for students, its location being one of its most valuable assets. This circumstance should be capitalized upon, along with the fact that the rooms are already some of the largest on campus and the building has a low maintenance cost. From a monetary and marketability standpoint, the location of the building makes it quite valuable. Housing Services would do well to have more beds with as good a revenue to cost ratio.

CBP&D

Introduction

2012

Figure 6 - Diagram of Façade Extension

Figure 7 - Donner with Full Extension Green House and PV

If Donner House were to be a prospective new dormitory scheduled to be located in its current location, one of the ﬁrst questions would be that of size. The university and housing Services would surely want to maximize the bed count at such a remarkable site. Additionally the matter of orientation would be a consideration, taking advantage of solar energy while addressing issues of privacy and accessibility. Certainly the existing building cannot be relocated. But there is the ability to manipulate the façade and roof surfaces so that the beneﬁts of solar

CBP&D

radiation and light can be harvested to great beneﬁt. And the method by which this could be accomplished might include increasing the size of the building, thereby increasing beds and rentable area, resulting in increased revenue, justifying the increased costs. Of course any investigation of a larger structure would have to be weighed against site conditions, funding structures and mechanical system capacity in relation to energy demand and comfort levels. These should not be seen as limitations but rather challenges to get more from the building than its current conﬁguration. Other opportunities include those that are more relational than physical. Volker Hartkopf, Director Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics Carnegie Mellon University, has nurtured numerous professional associations in the building industry that can be tapped into and combined to provide systems and materials that build off each other. The companies Volker has connected with are developing leading edge technology and these technologies when combined can provide what is considered best practices. For instance, Scalo Solar, Semco and Aircuity, provides expertise in Photovoltaics, Enthalpy Exchanger products and

Introduction

2012

sensing and IEQ monitoring equipment respectively. A monitoring system can improve the air quality for the occupants but can also increase the effectiveness of the ventilation system. These synergies are not often available in a project and are valuable afﬁliations that should not be wasted. Additionally, there are hidden opportunities that could also be exploited. New construction resets lifecycles that can reduce maintenance costs initially and high quality products if used may keep these costs low in the long term. Donner House is already a departure from the prevalent Henry Hornbostel architecture of the campus, which provides a precedent for incorporating high-tech materials and a contemporary aesthetic. The existing building has also a convenient structural system that is both simple and efﬁcient: the structural grid is highly adaptable to extension and expansion as well as for accepting new façade materials.

CBP&D

Approach to Decision Making

2012

Design can be seen as the answer to a conditional question. The better the circumstances are described and more clearly the question is formed, the better the answer will likely be. Moreover, providing more comprehensive reasons for asking the question in the first place, the more productive and better suited the resultant discourse will be. Typically, question asking and decision-making, in the realm of architecture, is made in stovepipes. Each stakeholder has their own criteria and priorities, each weighing benefits and disadvantages from their unique perspective. When this process is immersed in a capitalistic environment it is by its nature highly competitive and ultimately counter-productive. Working towards a common beneficial goal should not be a combative exertion but a collective endeavor. Connecting individual benefits to greater effect – better questions - so that better designs emerge – better answers. To this end this report applies an evidenced based decision-making process: a heuristic evaluation towards design that is not mere trial and error, but one beginning with a tailored premise to Donner House then proffering a suitable schema to affirm it. In turn, Carnegie Mellon University and Western Pennsylvania also benefit form this strategy. We have also framed the discussion, although primarily an architectural one, within a descriptive Pro-Forma framework. Recognizable from a developer’s viewpoint, both financial and practical viability is affirmed with value assigned to both tangible and intangible components.

Criteria This report is organized to demonstrate to various stakeholders that stovepipe thinking does not produce optimal results and that decisions that have a positive impact from multiple vantage points leads to a sum greater than that of individual solutions. Crucial to a cooperative process is the notion of integration, both in terms of design but also in operational execution. Additionally, there is an underlying premise that recommended solutions must adhere to best practice standards insuring the highest quality results. The inﬂuential modernist architect, Le Corbusier, described the “house as a machine for living,” and if we look past the aesthetic this sentiment implies, we can now in a highly developed technical era understand that buildings are indeed machines - quite complex ones in fact. Yet we generally do not construct buildings with nearly the precision or efﬁciency applied to locomotives, aircraft or automobiles. The Center for Building Performance provides 10 guidelines for high Performance Building Façades/Enclosures. These include; 1. Access to Nature, 2. Daylighting, 3. Natural Ventilation, 4. Heat Loss/Heat Gain Control, 5. Solar Heat Gain and Glare Control, 6. Load Balancing, 7. Passive and Active Solar, 8. Water Management, 9. Enclosure Life, 10. System Integration. 13

CBP&D

This list illustrates the multitude of complex issues that must be balanced in building design and while many issues are in addition to what may be considered for say, a car, a building has the advantage of not having to hurtle down the highway. The presumption in this case is that Donner House is energy inefficient, thermally uncomfortable, olfactory unpleasant, and visually straining (due to glare). Certainly, finding a single solution that satisfies the topics covered by the guidelines is a challenge and quite possibly impossible. However, best results will transpire when these topics are addressed in relation to each other as well as individually. The purpose of this report is to illustrate the viability and benefits of an integral design approach to a specific retrofit strategy for Donner House. For clarity and ease of explanation we shall describe each “system” in turn noting cost ramifications and then apportioning the influence on other systems. The synergistic influences are meted based upon the cumulative effects on health and performance of individuals, energy efficiency, and thermal, air, visual, acoustical and spatial quality. These are generally associated with green practices within the building industry and measured against the needs of Carnegie Mellon University.

Approach to Decision Making

2012

Beneﬁts of Green Building on Carnegie Mellon’s Campus: • Reduced capital cost • Reduced operating cost • Marketing beneﬁts (free press and product differentiation) • Reduced liability risk • Health gains and increased student performance • Attracting and retaining students • Future-oriented, staying ahead of regulations • New business opportunities • Satisfaction from doing the right thing Best Practices: Effectiveness of systems, both bricks and mortar and project delivery, are the basis for this report and shall be measured against Best Practices within the building industry. The Construction Industry Institute (CII) describes Best Practices as, “a process or method that, when executed effectively, leads to enhanced project performance.” (CII, 2011) CII lists 15 criteria for describing best practices, among them include; Benchmarking & Metrics, Constructability, Front End Planning, Materials Management, Partnering, Quality Management and Team Building. Of these none may be seen as separate from the whole but must be addressed collectively, at the designing, construction throughout post occupancy stages of a project. Design, construction and operations should bear the standard. 14

CBP&D

Passive House: The concept of Passive House epitomizes today’s highest energy standards, and holds the potential to slash heating energy consumption of a building by an incredible 90%. Widespread application of Passive House techniques would have an intense and far-reaching impact on energy conservation. The Donner House retrofit is an excellent opportunity to strive for Passive House standards. While the basic criteria and common ways to meet Passive House are outlined in the sidebar, the diversity of solutions is large, and is considered a strength of the program. In short, a Passive House is an extremely well-insulated, super air-tight building that is heated primarily by passive solar and internal gains. Remaining heat demand is provided by an extremely small source. Heat gain is avoided through the use shading and proper window orientation, which also helps minimize cooling load. A constant, balanced fresh air supply is provided through an energy recovery ventilator. It is clear that the Building Sector is a primary contributor of pollutants causing climatechange. In a world where organizations must match building energy needs, environmental needs, and financial constraints, Passive House presents an intriguing option for retrofitting buildings.

The primary Passive House target criteria are: • a total heating & cooling demand of <15 kWh/m2/yr (4.7 kBtu/ft2/yr) • total primary (i.e., source) energy of <120 kWh/m2/yr (38 kBtu/ft2/yr) • airtightness 0.6 ACH@50 Pa or less Almost all Passive Houses rely on: • very heavy insulation, R-40 to R-60 walls, R50 to R-90 roofs, and often R-30 to 50 sub-slab insulation • triple-glazed low-e windows, • excellent avoidance of thermal bridges • ultra-airtight construction (<0.6 ACH@50) • passive solar gain for a portion of the heating by orienting the house to the south & using a SHGC of around 0.5 • heat recovery, previously with earth tubes and more recently with dual core HRVs to reach high 80% to low 90s efﬁciency • heating of the ventilation air to provide space heating, although many homes use radiant ﬂoors, walls, ceilings, and radiators (Straube, 2009).

Approach to Decision Making

2012

CBP&D

Method Any discussion of the conditions of Donner House and possible improvements is a complex and interconnected network of issues that are not all easily quantifiable or directly comparable. Development decisions are not made from strictly architectural or product driven arguments typically. Bricks and mortar decisions are often influenced greatly by other value based markers, such as financial viability, philosophical approach and environmental concerns. Strategically, these issues as they relate to one another and suggest tactical or specific solutions to achieve overall goals. The starting point must be a commitment to fully integrate the design decision as well as the systems or products that come forth from these decisions. The advantage of an integral design decision-making process is that component effectiveness is maximized beyond mere increased efficiency. For instance, a façade choice effects and is effected by aesthetic, financial and performance criteria, but more importantly by other system choices. Mechanical system type, size, location and even quantity (number of units) is determined by façade choices, roof type and configuration, material choices, energy supplies, the availability of energy sources and desires for specific comfort requirements. Typically a mechanical engineer (or any decision maker for that matter) more often chooses a system based upon familiarity rather than appropriateness. The mechanical system, therefore, has been chosen the moment the engineer was chosen and that decision may have had nothing to do with the specific project. The need for the mechanical system to be designed integrally with its individual components as well as the other building systems should, by now, be self-evident. However, we shall address each part of the HVAC system in turn, first describing the systems, assigning value and cost benefits and connecting synergetic relationships among the building systems as a whole. The existing radiator system used to heat the rooms relies on the campus’ district steam system. Since this steam is not metered at the point of connection to Donner House this may seem like free heat from the isolated building’s perspective and in a literal sense it is because the building does not have a steam utility bill. Economically there is little incentive to invest in a new building specific central heating system - as long as the radiators work reasonably well. But herein lies the rub. When the total thermal comfort of the residents is considered along with the relationship the radiator system has with the other building systems, the radiator system does not work reasonably well. Inefficiencies of the steam plant distribution and delivery aside, the radiators are ineffective in providing consistent, homogeneous heat throughout the building. Moreover, if we presume that the current envelope of Donner House in conjunction with ventilation and cooling systems will be upgraded to address thermal properties, then the current radiators would not be an adequate or appropriate heating system choice. Moreover, if additional floor area is actualized the mismatch is compounded.

Approach to Decision Making

2012

CBP&D

One of the benefits, hoewever, that the radiant system employed at Donner House possesses is the efficiency a liquid radiant system has over an air-distributed system. Setting aside the transfer inefficiencies between the district steam system and the building’s distribution network, liquid has ten times the capacity to transfer energy than air for similar volume. The mass of the façade, due to the cmu walls made the choice of a radiant system wise. But neglecting any insulation to retain the controllable radiant heat relegated the performance to the uncontrollable outdoor conditions. Additionally, the homogeneous façade treatment meant that different outdoor conditions could produce a single building that simultaneously is much too hot and much too cold. This neglect for specific treatment for differing conditions was due little to mechanical system choices, yet doomed the system to be ineffective from the onset. Furthermore, the system, while matched to a relatively massive exterior wall, was incapable to adapt quickly to changing conditions through a day season or year

Approach to Decision Making

2012

Descriptive Pro-Forma In commercial development, the notion of a Pro-Forma to justify the feasibility of a project is rather simple: numerically show that the money expected to come in is greater than the money going out. The “money in” side or Revenue is comprised of Income, Equity and Capital. The “money out” side or Expenditures consists of Land and Construction Costs, Administrative Costs and Operational Costs. There are many variations on the numerical organization and presentation of this equation and we shall provide one such variation below. This report, however, shall supplement this numerical chart with a description of the integrated factors that influence the feasibility of our recommendations providing justification for the value of choices to be made. An implicit aspect of a Pro-Forma is that of value and this must be shown to balance. Costs and income are set values that are often established on market norms. The market value is explicit in the price paid on a particular amenity, or service. If an amenity does not have an established price, one must be generated. In the case of Donner House, when we look at the choices available to improve the quality of the building there is set costs for items such as material and labor. But what of the costs associated with the time of construction? Typically that may be a function of the interest rate on a construction loan and possible delay penalties associated with repayment. But for CMU construction might be paid directly from a department budget. The interest that would have been paid has associated value that, nevertheless, must be evaluated. If value is not assigned to this potentially halting financial burden, and dismissed as irrelevant, assessing true savings cannot be assessed. It is helpful to view a development, whether it’s a new project or a renovation, from a developer’s perspective. Even though the university works on a different financial model than a typical business, the basic tenant of financial risk to value remains.

CBP&D

For this report, the framework for the building improvement recommendations shall be presented in a similar way that a Pro-Forma would be structured in order to tie the codependent benefits and energy reduction benefits with the value of the components. As with any Pro-Forma there is a level of uncertainty and value must be assumed based upon the best currently available information. This report focuses on specific building components and their interoperability. The report is not intended to be an authority on the financial opportunities or structures afforded to the university, but the Pro-Forma format allows for these areas to be budgeted allowances. The allowances shall be reasonable estimates based upon current Pittsburgh markets or on the necessary values to balance costs. Cost allowances for items not directly addressed in this report shall be based upon reasonable unit costs for western Pennsylvania as a percentage of overall construction or anticipated project costs. Since this response to Donner House is at a preliminary viability stage, the values shall be estimated at a programmatic pre-design level – meaning that unit costs and unit revenue shall be used. Specific values when known shall be normalized per unit and incorporated into the Pro-Forma. Future examination of products or systems should be addressed in terms of First Cost analysis, Life-Cycle value, integrative benefits. There is a tremendous opportunity for this project to renovate Donner House to bring together and showcase what is possible from the research and innovation of the university with that of industry. The systems and products that are mentioned in this report illustrate the opportunities each may have when coupled together. For instance, Manufacturers such as PPG, Kawneer, and Grahm, already have direct relationships due to their inherent product reliance. But further business relationships may be forged with companies such as Beyer Eco Commercial, Burns and Scalo and LTG. Companies that may on the surface seem like they have little in common with the window industry, but indeed have a significant impact on the performance and success of a building. Integral design has an additive effect on the success of a building. Below we shall show the benefits of the interconnectedness and interdependence of building systems.

Approach to Decision Making

2012

Integration

CBP&D

2012

��

�

��

�

��

The many components of a building affect each other directly and sometimes indirectly. In either case the impact can be real and significant. Below is a chart illustrating the potential relationships of building systems that would be possible in a renovation to Donner House. The dots in the integration matrix represent one system affecting another. 52% of the matrix has dots representing interconnectedness. This is a significant relationship indicating that decisions and products chosen for any particular system is likely to effect over half of the building’s other systems. These relationships may be physical or they may be relational or they may be financial. Regardless of the type, that they have a relationship requires a need to address them collectively.

�

��

� � � � � � � � �

� � �

� � � � �

�

� � � � � � � �

� � �

�

� � �

�

� �

� � � � � � � � � � �

� �

�

� � � �

� � �

� � � � �

� �

�

� �

�

� �

�

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

� �

�

� � � �

� � � � � � � � �

� � � � � � �

� � �

�

� � �

� �

�

� � �

�

� � � �

�

� � � �

�

� �

� � �

Figure 8 - Integration Matrix

CBP&D

Products, Integration, Value As mentioned previously, building components, systems and products are often chosen out of convenience rather than for high performance. Certainly costs factor into the equation and may even be the leading criteria in the decision making process. This should not be ignored but addressed in an honest and rigorous manner. The idea of value engineering is a necessary step in the design or decision-making phase of a project. But the term and subsequent functionality of value engineering often gets denigrated to product cutting for the sake of saving money. What is often left out of the discussion, unfortunately is the primary element of the term and process – value. Value is not simply the monetary designation of an item, or the amount one is willing to pay for it. In fact the amount one is willing to pay may not be the true cost of the item. There are intrinsic qualities that are not readily identiﬁable and the savvy consumer will ﬁnd value at a low cost. Such thinking must be incorporated into the decision-making for buildings. If choices are made solely on a monetary basis, the results are often cheap in every

Integration

2012

sense of the word. The systems illustrated in the following sections shall describe the physical nature of the components, connect the relationships to other building systems, and provide financial figures for the systems. Since the systems explored below are not final design choices, it is difficult to assess the total monetary impact one system may have on another. But as we shall see when the cost for certain items are reasonably similar to other viable items we can compare the total costs within the overall framework of the developmental package.

CBP&D

Façade:

A building’s enclosure is made up of the six sides of the building – the roof, the four walls (including the windows and doors), and the foundation. On the heating and cooling side, the Donner House retrofit will be enclosure driven—drastically reducing the heating and cooling needs. In this retrofit scenario, the new super insulated shell will be the main energy-saving feature, allowing tiny (compared to today’s common practice) high efficiency mechanical heating and cooling equipment to match the greatly diminished loads. (Castle Square Tenants Organization, 2010). The new envelope must be built as tightly as possible to prevent air leakage (infiltration). If designed and constructed effectively, enclosure improvements (generally with minimal maintenance) can last the life of the building. Savings from enclosure improvements are permanent (Castle Square Tenants Organization, 2010).

Integration

2012

Images show the ﬁrst two steps of a project planned as a Deep Energy Retroﬁt: Castle Square Apartments in Boston. This project achieved an energy savings of 72%. http://www.castledeepenergy.com/

Figure 9 - Envelope Diagram

A “Deep Energy Retrofit” is defined as a renovation with energy savings greater than 50 percent. Donner House will achieve a deep energy retrofit, with the air-tight, highly insulated enclosure being be the driver for energy savings. Buildings walls are not unlike human skin; they must dynamically support heat, air, and moisture transfer to ensure the longevity of the building in a constantly changing climate. Walls must They must be. Environmental life cycle assessment, ease of installation, and waste minimization are all important factors which should be weighted when selecting exterior wall type.

CBP&D

Exterior Walls The construction of exterior walls affects comfort, operating costs, acoustics, and the size of the mechanical heating and cooling systems. There are many integration-related aspects to consider regarding exterior wall selection in a high-performance building. Basically, they must dynamically support heat, air, and moisture transfer to ensure the longevity of the building in a constantly changing climate. Environmental life cycle assessment, ease of installation, waste minimization, and optimal insulation levels are all important factors which should be weighted when selecting exterior wall construction type. There are countless options for façade walls; two options that demonstrate high-performing and integrated characteristics are listed here.

Integration

2012

Option 1 – Centria Formawall Dimension Series Building and energy codes have become increasingly stringent in recent years. Insulated metal panels (IMPs) can be used as a high performing wall panel system that can be used for an optimized, thermally efﬁcient building envelope. One such wall panel system is Centria’s Formawall Dimension Series. Centria is a member of Bayer’s North American Eco-Commercial Building Program and is based in Moon Township, just outside of Pittsburgh, PA. Innovation: traditionally, metal wall panels were insulated on site. Over the past few decades, a preinsulation process at the plant rather than at the site has been developed. This process has provided more rigorous control of quality and performance and has brought much-needed standardization to 22

CBP&D

the science of envelope design. The process consists of injecting a liquid-insulating foam such as polyurethane between two metal sheets, either steel or aluminum. The foam expands to fill the interior cavity, fuses to the metal skin, and solidifies to create a light-weight monolithic panel (Castore, 2011). Benefits: the benefits of a system like this are numerous. Most saliently, the fully-assembled wall R- value (between 20 and 30, depending upon the type and thickness of the insulating core), lowers a building’s energy costs over its entire lifecycle. Additionally, this system ensures long life for the building envelope by minimizing air and moisture degradation. See the sidebar “FORMAWALL DIMENSION SERIES: The Complete Wall system” for the differences between this wall system and a traditional wall system.

Figure 10 - Formawall Apllication

Integration

2012

K-12, Retroﬁt Education, Penn Yan Academy, Penn Yan, NY; Formawall Graphix Series (2”); http://www.centriaportfolio.com/ProjectDetails.aspx?projectID=341

The product’s low weight per unit area (a 2” panel is as low as 3 lbs./sq.ft.) lessens transportation and installation costs. The low weight means that installation requires only forklifts and small equipment. This eliminates the need for cranes and large equipment and saves construction costs and time. The end result is reduced labor costs and earlier building occupancy. Finally, reduced weight can also potentially provide savings in the foundation and the building structure through lighter framing members. Insulated metal panels contribute to a high level of efficiency during construction. IMPs can span greater distances than “single-skin” cladding. IMPs come in standard widths up to 36” and lengths up to 37’. The panels’ enhanced spanning and load-bearing capabilities result in high installation efficiency because reduced structural supports and bracing are needed. Cradle to Cradle: Formawall panels offer many ecological benefits. Recycled steel or aluminum content in a panel’s skin ranges from 22% to 26%. Also, the metal sheets and the insulating foam are 100% recyclable. Centria is developing a recovery program so that when Formawall panels will be removed from a wall (after their life span of 50+ years), they can be re-used on another project instead of going to a landfill (Centria, 2009). 23

CBP&D

Integration

2012

Multi-family, new building; Convent Hill Housing; Milwaukee, WI; Formawall Dimension Series (2”); http:// www.centriaportfolio. com/ProjectDetails. aspx?projectID=409 Figure 11 - Differences between a traditional wall construction and Centria’s Formawall wall panel system.

Ofﬁce retroﬁt; Larimer Corporate Plaza; Denver, CO; Formawall Dimension Series (2”); http://www.centriaportfolio.com/ProjectDetails. aspx?projectID=321

Figure 12 - Formawall Examples

Formawall products received the Cradle to Cradle* Silver certification five years ago. This certification program was developed to encourage the adoption of design principles which imitate nature and to create new products to benefit human health and the environment. The certification program focuses on products for cradle-to-cradle (vs. cradle-to-grave) cycles. These products are made up of materials which can be perpetually circulated in closed loops, which maximizes material value without damaging ecosystems. First Costs: it is critical to evaluate the full spectrum of factors when making building component decisions. Considerations must include crucial variables such as lifecycle analysis, total installation cost, ease of installation, structural requirements, and speed of construction Centria’s Formawall is an excellent choice for quality and value. (Castore, 2011) Installed cost for a 2” or 3” panel is between $35 and $37. � System Type

Wall panels

Specification

Formawall Dimension Series 2” or 3” panel (at current Aluminum Façade Area) Formawall Dimension Series (at non Aluminum Façade Area, i.e. entrance, stair, bottom level)

Quantity

Cost per area ($/ft2 & $/m2)

Total Cost

xxx ft2; x m2

$35-$37

22,000 ft2; x m2

$35-$37

http://eco.centria.com/formawall/ cradle_to_cradle.aspx

Entire nonglazed façade �

CBP&D

Option 2 – Innovative Wood Panel Facade Another option for facade is an innovative product currently being used in Germany which integrates cladding, insulation, and ventilation in prefabricated wood panels. This system was installed in 2010 on a 1930’s building in German and performance is currently being measured by the University of Applied Science in Rosenheim. Panels are produced off-site, pre-ﬁnished and including the windows. On-site this means optimal quality control and quick installation (requires only a crane and work platforms). This type of installation requires intense preliminary work so the Figure 13 - Top image from: http://www.bo-wohnungswirtschaft. de/index.php/holz-aktiv-fassade-256.html use of this system only makes sense in Bottom images from: Detail magazine, “Wood Panel Facades - Ecolarger, multi-story residential buildings refurbishment of Multi-Story Buildings” (Schankula, 2010) such as Donner. There are three options for the panels. The ﬁrst is designed to be a Passive House façade. The second includes a ventilator with heat recovery integrated into the panel. In the third option, the, panels are located behind an exterior glass skin between which exterior air is pre-

Integration

2012

conditioned using solar radiation, thereby becoming part of the heating system of the building

(Schankula, 2010). The manufacturer cites many advantages of this wood façade system, such as improved living comfort, larger windows, short construction phase independent of the season, no scaffolding needed, good soundprooﬁng, fresh air supply even when windows are closed, use of solar heat to generate low system temperatures (25°C) for wall heaters, prefabricated elements guarantee high quality standards, single-source planning, development, and construction services (“Active Wood Façade - B&O - Lösungen für die Wohnungswirtschaft,” 2011). Windows Windows are the essential connection between the occupant and the outdoors. They are the source of fresh breezes and allow us to know whether it’s snowing or the sun is shining. They hold the potential to greatly enhance occupant health and satisfaction. When designed

CBP&D

appropriately, they can act as light fixtures and natural ventilators to reduce the building’s electricity demand. But windows also play a major role in defining a building’s heat loss and heat gain and therefore are a large part of determining the size of a building’s mechanical systems. Windows are the traditional means for bringing daylighting into a building. Daylight is the cornerstone of resource efficient, high performance design, as it affects occupants both consciously and subconsciously. It provides light to see the work environment, a natural rhythm that determines the cycles of days and seasons, and biological stimulation for hormones that regulate body systems and moods. Window to Wall Ratio and Daylighting: a building does not need floor-to-ceiling glass to accomplish a successful day-lit environment. An excellent daylight design—one which offsets the need for electric lighting while providing views and access to nature—can be accomplished with a (vision glass) WWR of less than 50% (Straube, 2008). The potential for daylighting and view is a func¬tion of a combination of a window’s orientation, placement, area, and visible transmittance.

Integration

2012

View Glazing vs. Daylight Glazing: High-performing buildings typically separate windows into daylight glazing and view glazing in order to accomplish optimal daylight View Glazing Daylight Glazing admission, control glare and solar heat gain, and for the best, uniform light dis¬tribution. Daylight glazing aka high side lighting (usually above 7 ft) is high in the wall (above eyelevel) and prevents glare by keeping direct beams from directly entering the room. Light redirection devices, such as light shelves, help reﬂect light deeper into the room. Daylight penetration into a space from these windows is about two times the window head height. Moving the window higher in the wall increases daylight penetration in the space. View Figure 14 - http://phipps.conservatory. org/exhibits-and-events/featured-event. glazing (usually starting at 2’-6” AFF) is lower in the wall, aspx?eventid=168 and its purpose is to provide a view to the outdoors rather than provide ambient daylight for visual tasks. If done properly, ample daylight can enter through the daylight glazing and shading of view glazing can be increased to control glare and solar heat gain without compromising quantity of daylighting (Regents of the University of Minnesota, 2011). While it may not be feasible to have a daylight window and a view window at each “existing” dorm room, it is strongly recommended that this strategy be used at the two new ﬂoors. 26

CBP&D

Daylight Windows: Integrated Design Implications Design Phase: high side lighting requires high ceilings at perimeter walls. The best orientations for using high side lighting are North and (shaded) South. High side lighting is most appropriate for open plan interior layouts such as the new 7th ﬂoor ﬂexible space that allow unobstructed daylight Figure 15 Shading Diagram - http:// penetration, but should also be considered at the dormitory www.nrel.gov/docs/fy08osti/31545. pdf rooms. Reduced Plenum Space: to be effective, daylight glazing requires a minimum ceiling height of 9.5 ft. At the new 6 or 8 foot expansion, this could be accomplished if the structural system, HVAC ducts, and electric lighting are carefully integrated at the plenum zone. Sloping (or stepping) the ceiling upward at the perimeter in the new expansion zone could achieve the 9.5

Integration

2012

height requirement. Natural Ventilation: high windows can be especially beneficial for natural ventilation, in that they allow heated air to escape near the ceiling. Integration with HVAC: because of solar gains during the cooling season and heat loss in the heating season, daylight glazing will impact HVAC loads. These gains and losses can be mitigated by appropriate glazing size, glazing materials, shading, and photocontrol of electric lights. If these properties are properly balanced, using daylight glazing can assist in reducing the overall HVAC loads and potentially reduce HVAC system size and first costs. Ductwork should be kept away from high windows to avoid blocking daylight. Integration with Electric Lighting: high side lighting creates linear zones of daylight that run parallel to the perimeter wall. Electric lighting should be circuited parallel to this and photocontrolled (or manually controlled, in the case of the dorm rooms) in response to available daylight. Benefits: high side lighting can save energy and provide improved lighting quality by providing light through the most efficient light source--daylight. The energy savings come from reduced artificial lighting energy use, and the improved quality comes from an even distribution across the space and better color rendering qualities. Additionally, all the general energy saving, productivity, and visual comfort benefits of daylighting can be realized as part of this strategy. Cost Effectiveness: costs for high side lighting are low to moderate. A balance of view and clerestory windows can be provided for each room with minimal increase to the overall glazed area. The incremental cost of energy efficient glazing ranges from $0.75/ft2 to $2.50/ ft2 (CA CHPS, 2009). 27

CBP&D

View Windows: Integrated Design Implications Balance with Other Program Needs: view windows serve a multitude of important functions in the areas of view, social communication, egress, ventilation, and energy conservation. Unlike daylight glazing, view windows (or view glazing) are mostly inefficient at supplying working daylight to the space. There must be an optimal balance between viewing window are and high sidelighting window area. Integration with Mechanical Ventilation: operable view windows should be used to naturally ventilate the space and reduce mechanical ventilation needs. Evaluate prevailing wind conditions to assess the feasibility. A statistical analysis of 650 schools by the Florida Solar Energy Center found a strong correlation between the presence of operable windows and a decrease in indoor air quality complaints.5 Integration with HVAC: view windows will decrease overall seasonal heating and cooling loads on Donner House if they are glazed and properly shaded. Ideally, this will reduce the initial size of the HVAC system and thus annual energy costs. Thermal Comfort: window areas that are significantly above or below the mean radiant temperature of other room surfaces will be uncomfortable for occumants—as is the current scenario at Donner. To illiminate this problem, windows must be shaded; high performance glazing must be used; and HVAC must be designed to minimize radiant thermal discomfort. Design Phase: to function successfully, view windows should be at eye level, avoid producing glare, and designed to reduce building energy loads. Location and design objectives should be discussed and determined in the early phases of schematic design. Cost Effectiveness: costs for view windows are typically low. The incremental cost of energyefficient glazing ranges from $0.75/ft2 to $2.50/ft2 of glass. It should be noted that daylight energy savings from view windows are minor because the shading elements are needed to reduce glare usually make them unreliable for reducing artificial lighting use. Benefits: as stated previously, windows serve a multitude of important functions in the areas of view, social communication, egress, ventilation, and energy conservation. View windows provide occupants a connection with nature, weather, directional orientation, and some natural light. The connection to nature that they provide is essential for mental well-being and eye muscle relaxation. Studies show that the primary reason people prefer having a window is view (preferably of nature) and that natural views “elicit positive feelings, hold interest, and reduce fear and stress” (Norris & Tillett, 1997). View windows that are operable provide natural ventilation. Additionally, these windows can reduce the overall building heating and cooling loads. Donner’s north-facing view windows hold the potential to deliver enough dependable daylight to reduce electric lighting loads (if used with manual or photocontrols).

Integration

2012

CBP&D

Orientation: at roughly a 15° variance from true south, Donner provides an acceptable (performance will be reduced when compared to a true south orientation) window orientation for capturing useful daylight, provided that windows are properly shaded from low east/west sun angles. Shading Devices: for thermal and visual comfort (eliminate direct sun and reduce brightness/ contrast discomfort), and to minimize heat gain, exterior shading devices (overhangs, fins, etc.) should be provided. If shading devices prove infeasible, a lower transmission glazing adjusted for the window orientation should be used. Generally, about 40% transmission for south windows, 30% for east/west windows and 60% to 85% for north windows is suitable. Interior shades should be used on the southern orientations for the ability to adjust brightness and sun penetration. At Donner, shades on the north should be provided mostly for privacy. In general, visible transmission of view glazing should not be reduced below 50% in heavily overcast climates (Pittsburgh). Reflectance: surfaces (ceiling, flooring, and walls) at the new 6 to 8 foot extension should be painted white or off-white to aid in reducing contrast between the brightness of the window and its surrounding wall. Durability and Accessibility: all operable ventilation windows and all shading devices should have sturdy mechanisms that are easily accessible and easily repairable. Noise Transmission: windows are known as the “weakest link” acoustically in a building structure. Because of this, windows with multiple panes should be used. For improved acoustic performance over a standard double glazed window, windows should minimally have laminated glass on at least one of the panes and a significant airspace between the two panes. Balancing with Electric Light: the brightness from the view windows in the dormitory rooms should be balanced by washing other interior walls with electric light. Heat Loss/ Heat Gain through Windows: windows pose the classic design conundrum: the balance between the desire for thermal comfort, energy efficiency, and light quality (which all beg for smaller window areas) and the equally important desire for daylight, view, and connection with the outdoors (which all benefit from large vision-glass areas). Windows account for 10% - 30% of heat loss from buildings. Wherever there’s a window, there’s heat transfer through it. This transfer can occur in 4 different ways:

Integration

2012

1. Air leakage: Leakage occurs around the outsides of a windowpane and accounts for about half of all heating and cooling losses. High performance windows consist of the highest quality joints (glass-

to-frame and frame-to-frame) essential to mitigate against leakage.

2. Direct conduction: Heat is conducted directly through the frame or through the pane. To reduce this,

materials with low-conductivity, such as air or argon gas is placed between the panes, signiﬁcantly

cutting down on conduction losses.

CBP&D

3. Radiant transfer: Glass absorbs heat energy from its surroundings, and radiates it into cooler

air. This causes both higher air-conditioning costs in the summer and higher heating costs in the winter.

4. Convection: In the winter, warm interior air gets cooled when it comes into contact with the glass.

Integration

2012

It becomes denser, and drops towards the ﬂoor. The space it leaves is ﬁlled by warm air from above, and this creates a cycle of air movement that is self-perpetuating and chilly. This cycle can be broken

by good insulation or placing a heater under a window. Most conduction losses happen at the frame (Queens University, Faculty of Applied Science, n.d.).

Window Characteristics at Donner For the Pittsburgh climate, windows must both keep heat inside during the winter and air-conditioning costs low in the summer. Glazing with low Solar Heat Gain Coefficients SHGC and low overall U-value are ideal, because of the highly variable climate conditions and temperatures. Also, high glazing Visible Transmittance (VT) is ideal to maximize use of daylight and for providing views. Specific recommendations per window characteristic for Donner are listed below (“The Efficient Windows Collaborative: Resources,” 1998). The Ecotect analysis below shows differing lux levels in new proposed room configurations with varying glazing to wall area ratios. The red dashed lines represent the location of the existing facade. This study assumes a six foot extension will be added to the existing building. Each consecutive ring represents 300 lux of available daylight. NOTE: This study does not include the use of light redirection devices such an integral blinds or light shelves, which would greatly increase the depth of daylight penetration

Figure 16 - Ecotect Analysis 30

CBP&D

Use Windows with a High Visible Transmittance (VT) An optical property that indicates the amount of visible light transmitted. While VT varies between 0 and 1, most values among double- and triple-pane windows are between 0.30 and 0.70. The higher the VT, the more light is transmitted. A high VT is desirable to maximize daylight. Use Windows with low U-factor The rate of heat loss from an entire window assembly is indicated in terms of the U-factor (U-value). The nationally recognized rating method by the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) is for the whole window (glazing + frame + spacers). Center-of-glass Ufactor describes the performance of only the glazing (without the effects of the frame). Most energy efficient windows have whole window U-factors higher than the center-of-glass Ufactor. High-performance double-pane windows can have U-factors of 0.30 or lower, while some triple-pane windows can achieve U-factors as low as 0.15. Energy star recommends the following for U-factor in Pittsburgh: U≤0.30 (up to 0.31 if SHGC≥0.35, up to 0.32 if SHGC≥0.40). Use Windows with a low Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) The SHGC is the fraction “of incident solar radiation admitted through a window, both directly transmitted and absorbed” and released inward. It is expressed as a number between 0 and 1. The lower the number, the less heat it transmits. Like the U-factor, the nationally recognized rating method is for the whole window, including frame effects. Sometimes the center-of-glass SHGC is referenced, which describes the effect of the glazing alone. There is no requirement of SHGC in Pittsburgh, due to the fact that a high SHGC is sometimes used intentionally for heat gain in the winter. Passive House relies on passive heating to achieve it’s rigorously low heating energy standards, and therefore often employs the strategy of intentionally using glazing with a high SHGC for solar gain in the winter. This strategy, however, requires a high degree of careful planning of placement of thermal mass, appropriately selected interior finishes, precise window orientation and area, and exact placement and size of shading on every window. While using a high SHGC can be a successful strategy in Pittsburgh’s climate, it may not work at Donner, given the existing light frame construction, interior finishes, and inability to add substantial thermal mass, not to mention the lack of a true south orientation. Use Windows with a low Air Leakage (AL) rating Heat loss and gain occur happen by infiltration at cracks in the window assembly. This is indicated by the air leakage rating (AL). The lower the AL, the less air will pass through cracks. However, AL is an optional characteristic among NFRC ratings. However, code compliance typically tests for air infiltration is often tested. Select windows with an AL of 0.30 or less (units are cfm/sq ft).

Integration

2012

CBP&D

Specific Glazing Recommendations PPG has an online tool called Glass Configurator designed for help with glazing selection: http://glassconfigurator.ppg.com/default.aspx A few of the recommended glazing types appropriate for Donner are listed below. All options shown are clear glass, and are listed in order of thermal performance (lowest performers first). All glazing should have a low-e coating:

Integration

2012

Use an Aluminum Frame with a Thermal Break over 1⁄2: thick Aluminum window frames are a good option for windows at Donner ONLY IF a thermal break is provided to prevent heat conduction. Current technology with standard thermal breaks has decreased aluminum frame U-factors (heat loss rate) from roughly 2.0 to about 1.0 Btu/hrsq. ft-°F. First Cost The following window cost data was (installed cost, including overhead and proﬁt) taken from 2012 RS Means Building Construction Cost Data.

CBP&D

Internal or Integral Blinds Installing effective integral or internal blinds provides a variety of benefits, from reducing cooling loads to privacy to aiding in daylight distribution. These benefits are discussed below. Daylighting: to help bounce light deep into the rooms, horizontal blinds should be used. Some flat or curved blades can be effective at redistribution. If curved blades are used, they should be installed the opposite way than they are normally installed (so they are curved upwards). The most effective blinds have specially shaped blades for simultaneous optimization of visual transmission, passive cooling, and natural daylighting. While these more sophisticated-shaped blinds may not be the right choice for the dormitory rooms due to their higher cost and because of low dorm room use during daylight hours, they would make sense at the new 7th floor flex space. Privacy: Donner is in a highly visible location on Figure 17 -Light reflecti off Shading Device campus, without any natural privacy provision. It is

Integration

2012

critical for safety and for basic needs that privacy be a chief consideration during the Donner retrofit. This is especially true on the ground floor, where pedestrian traffic surrounding the dormitory is high and constant. There are many horizontal blind products which (when down but not completely in a closed position) provide a high degree of privacy while still maintaining a view out. Solar Gain Management: yet another benefit of blinds is the ability to mitigate solar gain: when it is hot, blinds can be in a position to minimize heat gain. Specialty blinds like the ones shown above are designed specifically to reject heat while directing visible light wavelengths in, simultaneously providing passive cooling and daylight. Glare Control: one major benefit of blinds is to prevent glare entering the dorm rooms. While glare is less of an issue on the north side, blinds are still recommended there for privacy reasons, but could be of a lower design grade. Different options offer various perforation options which help optimize the use of natural light (reduces glare and reflections without blocking the view) . The spacing of the horizontal slats is important in determining how much light falls into the rooms.

CBP&D

Maintenance: to avoid dust buildup, horizontal blinds are best placed between the glazing panes (integral) instead of on the inside. This placement will also help prevent damage as well, in a space such as a dorm room frequent-turnover (Innovative Design, 2004). Motorized Options: motorized blinds provide greatly improved convenience for user operation, eliminating the need to manipulate cords or rods. In addition, automated shades can improve performance of the shading system as a whole, as studies show that most people do not open and close shades in response to changing conditions outside (Hunter Douglas Contract, n.d.). While it would not be cost feasible to use motorized blinds in the dorm rooms, these blinds are worth investigating for the new ﬂexible space at the penthouse. Maximum indoor comfort can be achieved through building and automation systems which allow users discrete management over thermal control and light levels to suit individual or group needs. Automated control systems for solar shading and window coverings can also reduce energy use. Many automatic control options are available, including sun control systems which dynamically adjust to the angle of the sun to optimize the position of the shading system. Systems which automatically adjust to changing weather conditions Figure 18 - Double Glazed are also possible. Automated products and intelligent control systems Thermally Broken window

Integration

2012

http://sg-homeimprovements.co.uk/wp-

content/uploads/2010/01/uniblind.jpg exist to suit any budget (Hunter Douglas Contract, n.d.). First Cost: 2012 RS Means provides minimum and maximum cost ranges for window blinds (installed cost, including overhead and profit). The cost for a 2” aluminum slat horizontal louver blinds (“custom” as opposed to “stock”) is $10.30 –$16.45 per square foot; the steel version with the same specifications is $2.81 – $10.70. No cost data has been provided for integral blinds, which are assumed to be significantly more extensive.

CBP&D

Shading Well planned external shading is the most effective method of reducing solar heat gain. In addition, it offers possibilities for incorporating daylighting and passive heating. Each orientation requires different shading treatment because of the different sun angles. A south face is best shaded with horizontal shading while east and west faces require shading that blocks sunlight entering at low angles. A north face can often be left unshaded. External shading is a general technique that can be accomplished with many different types of hardware or architectural features. Shading may be fixed or movable. Common types are projecting horizontal shelves, balconies, eaves and overhangs, inset windows. fixed louvers, vertical fins, awnings, miniature fixed-louver materials, mesh materials, movable louvers, and roll-up external blinds. External shading is useful in almost all situations where direct sunlight through glazing increases the cooling energy requirement substantially. External shading reduces the temperature of the glass, improving comfort in some cases. Effective exterior shading blocks all or most direct sunlight, while still admitting indirect light. It typically reduces solar heat input by 80%

Integration

2012

Study by Aaron Chenault

CBP&D

to 90%. In buildings like Donner where solar load (as opposed to internal loads) dominates the cooling requirement, shading may reduce a building’s total cooling load by as much as half. The large reduction of cooling load would allow the capacity of the cooling equipment to be reduced and the savings in cooling equipment costs may pay for the shading, or a large part of it (“Reducing Cooling Load: Windows & Skylights,” 1999) Light Shelves and Louvers The purpose of an interior light shelf is bounce daylight coming through the daylight glazing portion of the window onto the ceiling and deeper into the space, thereby providing evenly distributed daylight at visually appropriate light levels. The use of light shelves (on the south façade) would have to be investigated to see if it would be cost-justiﬁed (especially given dorm rooms small size and the low occupancy rate during daylight hours). Another option for bringing daylight into the spaces (especially on the new ﬂoors) which may be more cost-effective is a light louver.

Integration

2012

http://lightlouver.com/assets/ docs/LL_guideslines_new.pdf

Figure 19 - Light distribution

http://lightlouver.com/assets/docs/LL_guideslines_new.pdf

http://products.construction.com/Manufacturer/C-S-Sun-ControlsNST151576/products/Lightshelves-NST33964-F

Figure 20 - Integral shading

Figure 21 -Light Shelf

Regarding light shelves, The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory states that light shelves extend the daylight zone up to 2.5 times the window head height. In order for light shelves to be effective, their surfaces must be highly reﬂective and the windows must extend high enough on a wall that the bottom of the light shelf is above human head height. Additionally, it may make sense to use different glazing above and below the light shelves (daylight glazing versus view glazing, as discussed above). Higher-transmittance clear glazing would be better above and lower-transmittance tinted glazing below. 36

CBP&D

Integration

2012

Sunshades at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University in Florida http://www.c-sgroup.com/sun-controls/custom/embry_riddle_aeronautical_university

Figure 22 - Exterior Shading example

Regarding light shelves, The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory states that light shelves extend the daylight zone up to 2.5 times the window head height. In order for light shelves to be effective, their surfaces must be highly reďŹ&#x201A;ective and the windows must extend high enough on a wall that the bottom of the light shelf is above human head height. Additionally, it may make sense to use different glazing above and below the light shelves (daylight glazing versus view glazing, as discussed above). Higher-transmittance clear glazing would be better above and lower-transmittance tinted glazing below.

First Cost RS Means does not have costs for many external shading devices. The closest Masterformat category is 08 91 19.10 Aluminum louvers, which is included below.

CBP&D

Foundation:

Donner House is an existing building and the major structural system does not need to be enhanced altered or modified. However, it still is an integral part of the building and any renovation will be influenced by it. The existing foundation system is robust and sufficient to adapt to almost any proposed façade treatment. Just as importantly, the foundation is part of the building envelope and as such can effect the building’s energy performance. One of the difficulties in achieving an airtight, super-insulated retrofit of a building is the difficulty in detailing the insulation given the existing structure’s conditions. A continuous insulation barrier (a thermal envelope) must be created. This includes the area at the foundation, which will require some excavation and addition of insulation in order to eliminate the thermal bridge to the ground. If uninsulated, heat would be lost to the ground throughout the winter (Gelfand & Duncan, 2011). The image shows where insulation is needed (Serra, 2011).

Integration

2012

Figure 23 - Previous Donner study showing where insulation at the foundations is needed (Serra, 2011)

CBP&D

Structure:

One of the basic assumptions is that the façade needs to be addressed in order to update the look of the dormitory and improve the building’s energy performance. This certainly can be achieved without disrupting the buildings main structural system, the steel and concrete structure can easily adapt to a new skin. But there is a possibility of Donner House expanding in order to justify costs and to provide the necessary platform for leading edge technology. If we were explore the possibility of adding two additional floors to the existing building, an evaluation of the existing structure must be made and indeed a study has in fact been made with the expansion in mind. A preliminary evaluation and schematic calculations provided by XXX has shown that the existing building could not support additional floors and that the most practical solution would be to provide a separate post and beam structural system at least six feet (1.82 meters) away from the existing foundation. The diagram below illustrates the general configuration. The proposed structure aligns with the existing structural grid that is an efficient and practical grid dimension. The size, spacing and configuration of the system considered the existing room layouts, the opportunity for other systems to be applied to the structure and costs. In this case the configuration provided the opportunity and benefit of allowing additional floor area that in turn can provide additional revenue that can help justify the additional structure. This comprehensive approach can also be applied when looking at the top floors which may require an open floor plan approach to accommodate multiple variations of layouts. If floor depth is increased marginally than it is possible to span the nearly 50 foot (15.24 meter) distance without interior support. It could also be designed to support a multitude of roof top options, some of which are explored below.

Integration

2012

Figure 24 - Structural Diagram 39

CBP&D

Roof - the Fifth Facade

Often enough, we tend to forget the roof and its importance. The roof, as the ﬁfth facade receives the maximum solar radiation and hence it is of crucial importance to the building envelope. With our design proposal, we aim at minimizing the building’s energy loads, by implementing a light colored reﬂective roof, and at producing solar energy by installing polycrystalline solar panels.

Integration

2012

Benefits of the reflective roof and solar energy The benefits of a reflective roof are numerous and the building industry is investing more on them the last few years. As the fifth façade of a building, a roof receives the greater part of radiation throughout the day leading to increased temperatures of the building envelope and consequently increased cooling loads. When a black tar roof is applied, solar radiation is absorbed and turned into heat that is released gradually throughout the day. During the summer months that leads to peak temperatures during the afternoon resulting at excessive energy consumption for air conditioning. Moreover, depending on the building and the efficiency of its HVAC system, the increased temperatures could compromise the thermal comfort of the users. Consequently, a reflective roof can help minimize the energy costs and ensure a healthy and comfortable environment for the users. On a bigger scale, reflective roofs have been proven to help mitigate the urban heat island. The urban heat island is a documented phenomenon since the 19th century and it is proven to create air quality problems in the urban microclimate. (Thomas Lee Smith, 2001) As far as solar energy is concerned, it is a great opportunity for the building and the campus, to install PV panels on Donner House’s roof. With the extension, Donner will have a great rooftop area to take advantage of and produce energy that could yield return of investment within a certain amount of time. Moreover, based on a conversation with Thomas C. Peters, the Executive Vice President of Burns & Scalo, even if the available budget of the project is not allowing the installation of PV, there are a lot of incentives and programs, through which the school could apply and make producing energy on site a reality. A really good opportunity is the investment from a third party. Due to the accelerated depreciation, the initiative for the investor is that there is an almost 70% decrease in taxes. Such an example is the Evie Garrett Dennis campus in Denver, which has been accredited under LEED Gold. Even though they could not afford the PV arrays, since the initial design they had taken under consideration the possible installation. That was a really clever thing to do as even before the project was completed they have gone under a power purchase agreement. Hence, a third-party provider

CBP&D

provided the economic resources for the purchase and installation of a 288 kW PV array on the campus. That lead to the third-party providing cheaper electricity to the school and after some years the PV array will belong to them. Hence, whatever the economic possibilities, the installation of a PV array should be deﬁnitely considered on the roof of Donner.

Integration

2012

Figure 25 - The Evie Garett Campus, Denver, Colorado

The system For the reflective roof, and EcoWhite EPDM roof finish is proposed. This product has the same general properties as the EPDM finish, it is easily and quickly installed, but it is reflective instead of black. The product is provided by the Firestone Company and has an initial solar reflectance of 0.80. (Firestone, 2012) In order to meet code, an R40 XPS insulation is installed under the EPDM finish. The proposed detail for the roof is shown below.

Figure 26 - Roof detail 41

CBP&D

As far as the photovoltaic panels are concerned, based on insightful information provided by Burns & Scalo, a 15° Low-Proﬁle Mount Pollycrystalline system is proposed. As the South part of the seventh ﬂoor is occupied by the greenhouse, there is opportunity of installing photovoltaic panels on the Northern part of Donner’s roof. (below) The available roof area is about 7,500ft2 and based on the system selected there is the possibility to install 115 panels, giving an area of 2,075 of PV. The selected PV is Sunmodule by the SolarWorld Company and the mounting system is provided by Panel Claw racking systems.

Integration

2012

Figure 27 - Panel Claw Racking system

Sunmodule is a 245W panel and it has dimension of 5.5 ft x 3.28 ft. Based on the calculations the 115 panels yield 28 kW power, which produces 30229 kWh annually and would result in $3500 of energy savings per year. (“PVWatts v.2: AC Energy and Cost Savings,” n.d.)

Figure 28 - View of Donner with PV on the roof 42

CBP&D

Integration

2012

Green House Based on the proposal of two new extra stories on the existing building of Donner house, we realized that it is a really good opportunity to incorporate new uses on the building apart from housing, which not only will promote both a new image of Donner, but of the whole university. Our vision includes a greenhouse in the new top floor, where vegetables and fruits will be produced. The fresh produce will be provided directly to the Dining Services. The information below is framing the greenhouse in the best case economic scenario and maximum size. Based on the information provided, the greenhouse could be downsized, depending on priority level. Benefits of the Greenhouse Urban agriculture has become a reality; the last decades an increasing part of the population has been growing fresh produce on rooftops, parks and backyards. Several studies have highlighted the numerous benefits of urban agriculture; facilitating access to healthy food while bringing together the community and strengthening the local economy (Blaine, T.W., Grewal. P, S,. Dawes, A., Snider, D. 2010). Moreover, it is proven that gardening can be a relaxing activity that reduces stress. (Kaplan, R. 1973) Involving the students in such activities can be only of benefit, as they undertake great amounts of stress in their daily life. This practice might help in the prevention of possible suicides among the student community.

CBP&D

Examples and Insights The proposal of a greenhouse on top of a university dorm is not an imaginary scenario. Within a month, the construction of the Lakeshore Residence Hall in the campus of the University of Wisconsin Madison is going to begin. On the top of the residence hall a greenhouse of 1,216 square feet is proposed. The greenhouse is going to be constructed by the Janko Company and its cost is about $230,000. The greenhouse floor consists of an epoxy floor finish on concrete slab (pitched to drain), on top of a layer of insulation and a secondary waterproof membrane, and its cost is calculated as $57,000. Hence the total cost for the greenhouse with the floor for the Wisconsin University is going to be $236/sqft.

Integration

2012

Figure 29 - Lakeshore Residence Hall Greenhouse

Figure302 - Lakeshore Residence Hall – 2nd View

CBP&D

In his book, Minnich states that a plot of 10x10 m (1076 sqft) within an average growing season of 130 days can produce the necessary fruits and vegetables for a household, based on their needs for iron and vitamins A, B and C. (Minnich 1983) Based on the 2010 U.S. Census Data 2.58 people are living per household. Hence, in order to nourish properly the 239 occupants of Donner House we would need almost 100,000 square feet. However, based on the upcoming technologies, plants can be grown vertically, with hydroponic systems. Based on that technology, plants can grow on stacked trays, or on towers (Figure 3). In that way the produce per square foot can be ten times more. Consequently, for Donner’s occupants, roughly 10,000 sq ft would be needed if a hydroponic system was set up. Moreover, the growing season within a greenhouse could be extended beyond 130 days, with negligible energy costs.

Integration

2012

Figure 31 - NY Restaurants with rooftop hydroponic systems. Left Bell, Book and Candle” - “From Roof to Table” - Right.

Based on the above calculations, if we were to dedicate all the South side of Donner (Figure below) to build a greenhouse on the 7th ﬂoor, we would have a 6900 sq ft greenhouse. This area would include both the growing area and the spaces for movement. 1900 square feet are enough space to have 4 feet corridors between the plants, hence 5000 sqft would be for pure production of fresh fruits and vegetables. That would satisfy about 120 people’s needs year around, based on Minnich’s calculations.

CBP&D

Integration

2012

Figure 32 - Aerial View of proposed Greenhouse in 7th Floor

Another example that gives an idea of the amount of vegetables produced per speciﬁed area, in a temperate climate and speciﬁcally in a rooftop greenhouse is the Gotham Greens rooftop greenhouse in New York. (Figure 5) The greenhouse covers an area of 15,000 ft2 and will produce 100 tons of vegetables. Their system is hydroponic and their produce includes two types of lettuce, basil and red sails red leaf. (“11-24-Gotham-Greens-Final.ashx,” n.d.) The cost of the greenhouse is calculated around $1.4 million. (“Gotham Greens Building First Hydroponic Rooftop Farm in NYC | Fast Company,”Ariel Schwartz) Finally, another rooftop greenhouse; Bright Farm Systems suggest that a 22,000 square foot system would produce 110 tons of vegetables. (“Food vs Energy - Taking the Debate up a Level.pdf,” n.d.)

Figure 33 - Gotham Green Greenhouse NY

CBP&D

Apart from providing fresh produce to the dinning services, the purpose of the greenhouse goes far beyond. It is used as an active teaching tool for the students as well as a symbol of Carnegie Mellon University’s initiative towards sustainable practices. Universities across the U.S. and Canada are already producing their own food through farm installations launched both by their and the students’ initiative. Except from the University of Wisconsin, Harvard Community Garden has been working successfully since 2010, where students collaborated with the Housing and Dinning Services and professors, the Oberlin College has a 2,600square-foot greenhouse and McGill University in Canada has been running an edible garden within campus since 2008. McGill University’s local produce has attracted a lot of attention, and in 2010 the total yield reached up to a ton of fresh produce. (McGill University 2008) Consequently, we realize that Carnegie Mellon University should be among the universities that lead the future.

Integration

2012

Relative Systems A great opportunity related to the greenhouse is the installation of thin ﬁlm PV on its roof. A shading device will be needed for the roof of the greenhouse; there is a possibility to do that through installing thin ﬁlm PV strips on its roof on certain distances, so that the plant growth is not impaired.

Figure 34 - Thin ﬁlm Pv on glass surface

Figure 35 - Kornaka Power Plastic

The Kornaka Power Plastic 40 Series offer great opportunities for greenhouses. They are semi-transparent strips that take light in and give power out. They can connect directly to the grid, or store energy for later. Moreover, the company has already tested them on an actual project and the produce of a greenhouse with Kornaka Power Plastic was the same to the one without them. Hence the yield is not affected by the the shading. However, in our case we are not going to cover the whole area with the Kornaka strips. The Power Plastic 1140 is selected with dimensions 2,407 x 676 meters (7.9 x 2.2 feet). Between the strips there is a distance of 5 feet, leading to a total area of 1597 square feet (148 sq meters). That would yield a power of 2.5 kW for the whole area and savings $350/yr. (“PVWatts v.2: AC Energy and Cost Savings,” n.d.)

CBP&D

As mentioned previously, hydroponics is a really effective way of producing vegetables, especially lettuce, spinach, tomatoes, etc. If hydroponics systems get implemented, maybe the size of the greenhouse can be minimized, minimizing the costs too. A lot of research is currently taking place about low-cost hydroponic systems. In Chicago, a non-proﬁt “Urban Canopy” has constructed and is currently putting under test a DIY hydroponic system. (“The Urban Canopy | Creating a sustainable and just agricultural system,” n.d.) The goal of the group is to make it an open source project and share it to the public, so that everybody can implement it easily. The system is made out of standard PVC tubes, and consists of 6-feet-tall towers, which are set with a 3 feet distance between them and can hold 20 plants. Based on a communication with Alex Poltorak, the designer of the system, each tower costs about $100 and the system is really easy to construct. Consequently, an interesting thought would be for architecture students to create the system within an area of the greenhouse, saving money from soil and increasing the production.

Integration

2012

Figure 36 - Urban Canopy -- Setting up the System

CBP&D

Greenhouse Estimated Costs

Integration

2012

Interior Flexible Space On the 7th floor next to the greenhouse, the vision is to have a flexible open plan floor, where different functions can take place; conferences, events, workshops, working area or even residential area for visiting population during the summer for continuing education. Benefits of a flexible space “Physical flexibility refers to the adjustability of a space to the practices of individuals, such as meeting the special sensory and/or mobility needs of students. Movable furniture and walls, or re-configurable buildings, rooms, and passageways all represent this type of physical flexibility.” (Monahan, 2002) The benefits of a flexible space are included within its own definition. A flexible space is a space that will never fall out of use. A space that can adapt through unforeseeable future changes due to deviations of users’ needs, uses, demographic shifts etc. (Moore & Lackney, 1994) Consequently, the costs of reconfiguration of the space are minimized. Moreover, flexibility in social structures, such as buildings within the educational sector, lay out opportunities of incorporating several seasonal functions which will allow the buildings to be active throughout the year. Hence, spaces that would be underused, or no used at all, during the summer months, by being flexible they become dynamic spaces that can yield economic growth. 49

CBP&D

In order to create this flexible space a raised floor will be required, where modular air systems, wiring services and data will be integrated. This system allows flexibility and a plug & play changes in power and controls, which leads to energy savings. In traditional practice, a relocation of power supply would cost about $400 per box and would put under threat the integrity of the slab. (Loftness & et al, 1999) Another great advantage of the raised floor system apart from flexibility is the under-floor air distribution system, which is a healthy method of air supply at the occupant level, compared to air supply from the ceiling. (McCarry & Blair T, 1995) Consequently, the whole floor works as a plenum and conditioned air is available throughout the space. This adds up to an improved indoor environmental quality. In the conventional air distribution from high points in the space, germs and pollutants are spread and shared more easily throughout the space and between the occupants. (Stenftenagel, David, 2010) Consequently, under-floor air systems can yield energy savings of 20-35% because of upgraded ventilation, fan power savings, increase in using outside air and delivering higher temperatures. (Loftness, Brahme, Mondazzi, Vineyard, & MacDonald, 2002)

Integration

2012

The System The systems applied in the flexible space, that should be taken into consideration are the following: raised floor with air distribution and networking, partitions, furniture and flexible lighting. Raised Floor System: An access-floor system by Tate, about 16” deep, will be applied, in order to have available space for the under-floor air system and the networking. (figure 10) The space below the floor will be used by the HVAC as a plenum in order to get a more unified distribution compared to the traditional systems. Constant volume swirl diffusers provide thermal comfort with reduced energy consumption. Moreover, the occupant is able to control both the airflow’s volume and direction. Finally, the diffusers are part of this plug and play system of the floor, so when the change of use demands it they can be displaced.

Figure 37 - Networking and Air distribution

Figure 38 - Occupant control

CBP&D

Partitions and Furniture As soon as the raised floor is set, the space will be ready for direct use. In case of workshops or temporary working spaces created on the seventh floor, office furniture and mobile partitions will be required. Partitions are easily stacked together, however furniture have limitations. In that case collapsible furniture is required. There are a lot of different options for those kinds of systems both for chairs and tables. (“EQUIP,” 2012)In case of temporary sleeping dwellings

Integration

2012

Figure 39 - Different collapsible furniture from EQUIP

needed during continuing education over the summer, or temporary students before moving to their actual room, there are several “clever” furniture that are mobile and and can be packed easily in boxes in order to get stored. An example of such a design is the product of Toshihiko Suzuki (figure 13), where an office set, a kitchen set and a bed set can be minimized into boxes. However, those can still be oversized for our project as they demand quite a space for storage. A better example for Donner’s 7th floor would be Casulo, a design, where a whole bedroom’s equipment fits into a significantly small box. (figure below).

Figure 40 - Toshihiko Suzuki

Figure 41 - Casulo

CBP&D

Lighting A soft ambient lighting system must be provided for the space (30 footcandle) for general activities and comfort while moving through the space. The rest of the lighting needs will be covered by efficient task lighting, depending on the current use of space. That can reduce the energy demand to 1.1 W/sqft, and yield energy savings of $11,900 per year. (Loftness & et al, 1999) As the use of the flexible space is not defined, the ambient lighting system should be appropriate for different uses. Consequently, highly efficient dimming ballasts should be incorporated, with individual controls.

Integration

2012

Flexible Space Estimated Costs

CBP&D

Energy Peformance

2012

Overview A simulation based energy analysis of Donner House was modeled and created with the parameters and assumptions listed at length below. The simulation was used to help craft and influence design choices based upon energy performance within the framework of the proposd building envelop technologies. The digital modeling of Donner House assumes the full proposed extention and expansion to the existing building with goal of reaching or exceeding Passive House standards. The energy performance study for the Donner house renovation has been conducted using Design builder v.3.0 and EnergyPlus v.6.0. The study has been conducted based on the ASHRAE 90.1 – 2010 for “Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings” and “The Department of Energy Reference Models for New Construction” and the various construction assemblies described previously. Simulation input parameters are specified in detail below. It is important to note that, this analysis does not include a specified/detailed HVAC system design and renewable energy generation systems. The energy analysis focuses on different systems like façade materials, window glazing, daylighting and shading and roof assemblies.

Results of the performance analysis provide an overview of the energy consumption, peak energy demand and the energy use intensity for the renovation of Donner House. The estimated Annual Energy Consumption is 3,863,072.94 kBTU (13,180,804.87 kWh). The Net Conditioned area of the site is 112,372.66 square feet (10,439.761 square meters) which is 100% of the total building area. The Energy use Intensity for the overall site is 34.4 kBTU/ft2 (117.3 kWh/m2), based on the net conditioned area. The weather data and the input parameters used for the simulation of Donner House is explained in detail below.

CBP&D

Simulation Parameters Weather Data

Pittsburgh is located on the East Coast of the United Stated of America and belongs to weather zone 5A. It is a heating dominated climate with cold winters and warm summers. This is evident from the number of heating design days versus the cooling design days. The charts below show the relative humidity, dry bulb temperature and Adaptive comfort model in ASHRAE Standard 55-2004 in Pittsburgh for the whole year.

Energy Performance

2012

Figure 42 - Adaptive Comfort Model in ASHRAE standard 55-2004 (from Climate Consultant)

CBP&D

Building Envelope:

Building envelope materials have been applied based on the speciﬁcations of CENTRIA Formawall Dimension Series. The standard U-values for the speciﬁed materials are taken from ASHRAE – 90.1 2010 “Energy Standard for Buildings except Low-Rise Residential Buildings” and The Department of Energy (DOE) Reference Models for New Construction.

Lighting Power Density:

Energy Performance

2012

Lighting power densities for residential units are based on the ASHRAE 90.1-2010 standard, “Energy Standard for Buildings except Low-Rise Residential Buildings”.

Equipment Power Density:

Extensive research has been conducted by the students in University of Colorado, Boulder, and MIT about the behavioral changes of residents in Residence Halls during 2008. Studies were conducted to analyze the equipment usage in the residence halls. The study conducted by students of University of Colorado, Boulder indicate that, “students bring anywhere from

Figure 43: Chart showing the electronic devices owned by students

6 to 19 electronic devices to school. Generally, the average person brings about 10 electronic

devices to school.” The above chart shows the devices commonly used in residence halls according to their order of usage. Using the above chart, the equipment density has been calculated by taking into account the top 12 items. From the charts above, we see the average usage of electronic devices in residence halls. Based on this information, the equipment density for the purpose of simulation has been estimated.

CBP&D

Energy Performance

2012

Figure 44: Chart showing the comparison of devices owned and plugged in

Figure 45: Chart showing the devices which students believe can be unplugged when not in

CBP&D

HVAC Systems:

HVAC systems, for the purpose of simulation, are assumed as district heating and district cooling. In the current HVAC system, the steam is brought into the basement of Donner house through the main campus steam loop. This steam is then converted into hot water through a heat exchanger which is located at the basement of Donner house. Since the usage of steam has not been metered, there is no data available providing the consumption of steam by Donner house. In order to simulate the district heating and district cooling system, it is essential to have full details about the efﬁciency of the transported steam from the plant to the campus and from the campus main loop to Donner house. Since all these parameters are unavailable for this simulation, for the purpose of energy analysis, components such as façade materials, glazing and improvising the indoor lighting conditions are given importance. The system used for the purpose of simulation is a simple district heating and cooling system generated by EnergyPlus and no changes have been made to increase its efﬁciency.

Energy Performance

2012

Window to Wall Ratio:

Based on the analysis below, the window to wall ratio assumed for the purpose of simulation is 30% for the whole building. Windows are assumed to be equally spaced providing a window to wall ratio of 30%. ��

�

��

Table 1: Building areas calculated in EnergyPlus v.6.0

CBP&D

Building �Area: �� External Walls – CENTRIA Formawall U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) 2 U-value (W/m K) Internal Walls – Lightweight 2x25mm gypsum plasterboard with 100mm cavity U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) 2 U-value (W/m K)

External Floor – Slab on grade

Material Properties Envelope Layer

��

�� 0.062 0.352

��

�� 0.289 1.641

��

U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) 2 U-value (W/m K) Internal Floor – Slab between floors U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) 2 U-value (W/m K) Roof – U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) 2 U-value (W/m K)

Thickness (m)

��

Energy Performance

2012

0.062 0.363 ��

�� 0.434 2.464

��

�� 0.025 0.142

� Table 2: Thermal properties of Building Envelope Assemblies

Glazing Properties:

Glazing materials for the purpose of simulation has been adopted from the PPG catalog. PPG being on of the possible partners for the project, it is best to use real data from the manufacturers for the purpose of simulation to get results closer to reality in terms of glazing effects. The table below describes the glass name used for the renovation of Donner house with the type of window frame. �

�� Window Frame U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) U-value (W/m2K)

ASHRAE 90.1 – 2010 BASELINE MODEL1 Thickness (m)

Material ��

U-value (Btu/hft�ºF) U-value (W/m2K)

0.831 4.712 �� 0.29 1.64

Total solar transmission (SHGC)

0.34

Window panes

� Table 3: Properties of glazing materials

��

�

CBP&D

Viability

2012

The viability of a project can be seen as determining the value gained to be greater than the cost expended. As mentioned earlier, a proforma is a useful tool to determine viability. Development costs minus Equity and Capital investment must balance with Revenue minus Expenses. Below we shall look at three scenarios to compare the value for providing upgrades to Donner House. When providing best practices and leading technology to a project and this is looked at through the lens of a developer, even for a university, the value of that technology is greater than initial costs, or certainly a smaller percentage of the overall costs. The three scenarios that will be compared are: The Existing Building - as if Donner House were to be built in its current configuration in today’s market. The Addition Only – Looking at the viability of the proposed addition only in relation to the existing building. The Existing Building with the Addition – as if Donner House were to be built new in the proposed fully expanded configuration in today’s market. From these scenarios it shall be expected that the costs for the addition would make better sense than if a new facility were to be constructed for the same location. In this manner, the value of Donner House with improvements may be established. It is also expected to reveal that the premium paid for cutting edge technology is a significantly low percentage of the overall development costs and is out-paced by its added value. Some assumptions regarding the Pittsburgh market in terms of land, construction and financial costs were made. These include: Construction Cost per square foot (square meter) – for a multi-unit residential building greater than four stories in the Pittsburgh area, a cost of $350 per square foot ($3,767 per square meter). Soft Costs – these are typically 33% of the Direct Construction Costs. Service Fees and Operating Reserves are allotted within this assumption. Land Value per square foot (square meter) – typically land value per square unit is not a good absolute value indicator but for comparison purposes it is useful. In Squirrel Hill where the median land value is slightly higher than the average in Pittsburgh, the assumed value is $150 per square foot ($1,614 square meter). University Capital – money contributed by the university to close the financial gap. There is no presumption of the department or avenue with which the capital is obtained. For the purposes of the proforma the loan amount is indicated as a reference point and the university may explore loan options. Revenue Rates – Room rates are assumed from the existing university dormitory rate schedule provided on their website. 64

CBP&D

Vacancy Rate – is assumed at 2% as the dormitory can draw from a large student pool. Parking – assumed to be similar to those spaces available adjacent to Donner currently and that the revenue from these spaces would be applied to a similarly to a new development. Revenue – it is assumed that revenue is generated on a 10 month basis but is also shown for full time (12 month per year) for comparison. Expenses – assumed to be 24% of Total Revenue. A summary of the three scenarios are shown below for reference, a breakdown follows. Full Proformas are provided in the Appendix

Viability

2012

Proforma Summary for Three Scenarios ��

� ��

��

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

� � �

�

� �

�

��

� �

��

� �

� ��

� �

�

��

�

� �

�

��

� ��

��

�

��

�

��

� �� 65

CBP&D

Development Costs Development Costs are established by projecting the direct costs of the project, both hard (construction) and soft (professional and other fees) and assigning value. For comparison purposes we have assume that the construction costs would be the same under any scenario although there might be some economies of scale differences dependent on the scale and scope of the work. Regardless, the costs can not be determined precisely at this preliminary

Viability

2012

Cost Breakdown Existing Scenario ��

��

�� 66

CBP&D

stage, however a budgetary number may be set if we set a unit cost at $350 per square foot ($3,767 per square meter). From this construction hard cost ﬁgure, a breakdown of systems costs are established and we can measure these against estimated costs per component.

Viability

2012

The preceding and following charts show the breakdown for the component system costs and the relative percentage of the overall budget amount. Also, the amount and relative percent-

Cost Breakdown Addition Only Scenario ��

��

�� 67

CBP&D

age of the soft costs are indicated. As mentioned in previously the soft costs are generally one third of the construction costs. Contingencies are include at 5%. Despite the fact that for the Addition only scenario the structure is in addition to the existing structure, there still is a signiﬁcant amount and the relative percentage of the Structure and Façade for the Addition only scenario is similar to the others.

Viability

2012

Cost Breakdown Full Expansion Scenario ��

��

CBP&D

Assests and Equity In any development there are existing elements that can be attributable to the value of the entire project. These assets can be real property, contributable products or services, or capital. Assets can be designated as Capital or Equity. Equity may include items such as, materials or products incorporated into the construction, services provided during design, or the difference between the value of the land and the procurement cost. Capital investments would be strictly money provided either as collateral for a loan or direct payment for products or services in the development. Capital is separate from the revenue generated by the project, if any, or payments made on loans or mortgages. University campuses, as is in our case, own land and buildings that have quite substantial equity value. But this value is often overlooked in relation to development discussions unless land needs to be speciďŹ cally purchased for a building. Donner House exists on land owned for over sixty years and in that time land values in Pittsburgh have steadily risen. Donner House also is located on campus very close to the residential neighborhood as well as to Schenley Park, a tremendous amenity of the city.

Viability

2012

Existing Building

If one were to build a new building in the Squirrel Hill Neighborhood of Pittsburgh, one of the ďŹ rst things to consider would be, the location of the building. The land, its value, and purchase price would be a major factor. If there were an existing building to be bought and renovated, the value of the real property (land plus structure) would be considered. Land in an urban setting, that is not already developed, is not often available so establishing land costs are inherently varied. Unit costs for land are not easily transferable within a city and different neighborhoods have wildly different land values. In Squirrel Hill, a residential neighborhood, property values are relatively high, although the median property listings are close to the city median. If Donner House were considered as settling on its own land situated in near the park and directly adjacent to the university, the land value would be considered on the high end of the spectrum. We have set the land value for a site of 26,000 square feet (2,415 square meters) at 3.9 million dollars. For more than a half of an acre (.4 hectare) of development ready property with district heating and utility infrastructure in place, in addition to in-place site improvements roads and walkways etc., this is a reasonable value of $150 per square feet (1,614 per square meter). This property may be attributed in the proforma in Acquisition Costs but is also provided as Equity since the university owns the property. The value nevertheless is a necessary amount to add to the understanding of the overall value to the project. 69

CBP&D

Products

Depending upon the business, marketing, professional and university relationships that may be established, certain products may be incorporated into the project that have value and would be considered Equity investments. As mentioned earlier in the report, exiting synergistic relationships between PPG and Kawneer or newly developed relationships between Kawneer and, say, the Green House manufacturer, could provide Equity based contributions. Donations of speciﬁc materials such as glass or metering equipment could be counted as equity. As a budgetary calculation, 2.8 million dollars or slightly over 5% of the total development costs for the Full Expansion scenario, would be expected to be contributed product related equity. This is very near the contingency percentage for the proposed scenario and a reasonable goal for attracting stakeholders that would want to be involved with a high proﬁle project. The contribution power of product donation could be leveraged into capital contributions as well.

Viability

2012

Capital

“Money reigns supreme,” as the adage goes. Capital is critical for any development project, if for no other reason than to keep a positive cash-flow during the project. Capital will also offset long-term debt service. We have assumed a total of 2.5 million dollars of infused capital. This cash would ideally be seen as gifts rather than investments as we are not privy to university capabilities for certain tax-credit or other non-profit related incentives and investment opportunities. Angel contributors, or individuals that see the inherent benefit of high quality, sustainable architecture may find this type of project worthy. But even they may want to see the cost benefits of their contributions. At 5% of the total development costs for the Full Expansion scenario, this amount would match contributions for product contributions.

Design and Research Services

In terms of contributed equity into a project, donated services are quite easily the most difficult to calculate, both in terms of quantity and rate. Form a budgetary standpoint, professional services may be assigned as a percentage of the construction costs and they are allotted as indicated I the proforma for each scenario. Research and development services on the other hand are much less established. For Donner House the expertise contributed in time and effort to the improvement of the facility, such as this report and previous ones, could be considered priceless. For our purposes, however, we can cap the budgeted value at 3% or just at the same rate as engineering services. Nearly three years of post graduate work has already been contributed to investigating Donner House specifically as well as research and development of systems integration and building performance analysis. Add to that the cultivation of synergistic relationships among product service and research within the building industry and the value seems justified.

CBP&D

Revenue University Gifts and Donations Government Incentives Financing Income and Cash Flow

Proforma Criteria

2012

Expense Operation (Maintenance Administrative

Value Building Campus Regional

Summary

CBP&D

2012

Integration and Performance We looked at education buildings as sampled by CBECS ﬁrst looking at characteristics applicable across the nation and then at speciﬁc components and consumption statistics by region. We utilized EUI as a comparative metric to evaluate different building components for the school buildings that include them. Nationwide values were not tied directly to energy consumption but were included for reference and contextual purposes.

Design We looked at education buildings as sampled by CBECS ﬁrst looking at characteristics applicable across the nation and then at speciﬁc components and consumption statistics by region. We utilized EUI as a comparative metric to evaluate different building components for the school buildings that include them. Nationwide values were not tied directly to energy consumption but were included for reference and contextual purposes.

Conclusion We looked at education buildings as sampled by CBECS ﬁrst looking at characteristics applicable across the nation and then at speciﬁc components and consumption statistics by region. We utilized EUI as a comparative metric to evaluate different building components for the school buildings that include them. Nationwide values were not tied directly to energy consumption but were included for reference and contextual purposes.

CBP&D

References

2012

Boyuan Li, Jorge Inostroza, Shalini Ramesh, Weiyu Zhan. Environmental Quality Report for Donner House, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA. Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics, Department of Architecture, 2012. Oehlerking, Austin. “Establishing a demand curve for Plug Load Electricity Consumption in an MIT Dormitory.” 2008. Students of ENVS 3001, Dr. Lisa K.Barlow. “Implementing Behavioral Change in Residence Halls at the University of Colorado at Boulder: Energy Conservation & Reusable Bags.” 2008. 11-24-Gotham-Greens-Final.ashx. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/en/ Page-Sections/Research-and-Development/Controlled-Environmental-Agriculture/~/media/ Files/EIBD/CEA/11-24-Gotham-Greens-Final.ashx EQUIP. (2012). Retrieved May 13, 2012, from http://www.equipofficefurniture.com.au/ tables/training-and-folding-tables/eq3000-folding-leg-table Firestone. (2012). Firestone Building Products U.S. - RubberGard EcoWhite EPDM Roofing System. Retrieved May 15, 2012, from http://www.firestonebpco.com/roofing/epdm/ ecowhite/ Food vs Energy - Taking the Debate up a Level.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from http:// thenegativecharge.squarespace.com/storage/Food%20vs%20Energy%20-%20Taking%20the %20Debate%20up%20a%20Level.pdf Gotham Greens Building First Hydroponic Rooftop Farm in NYC | Fast Company. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2012, from http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/ariel-schwartz/sustainability/ gotham-greens-building-first-hydroponic-rooftop-farm-nyc Loftness, V., Brahme, R., Mondazzi, M., Vineyard, E., & MacDonald, M. (2002). Energy Savings Potential of Flexible and Adaptive HVAC Distribution Systems for Office Buildings. Retrieved from http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/795647-mYaJMf/native/ Loftness, V., & et al. (1999). A Case Study of the Soffer Tech Office Building. Retrieved May 11, 2012, from http://pdffinder.net/A-Case-Study-of-the-Soffer-Tech-Office-Building.html McCarry, & Blair T. (1995). Underfloor air distribution systems: benefits and when to use the system in building design. Retrieved May 10, 2012, from http://md1.csa.com/partners/ viewrecord.php?requester=gs&collection=TRD&recid=200124023013CE&q=benefits+of+u nderfloor+air+distribution+system&uid=791758685&setcookie=yes 73

CBP&D

Monahan, T. (2002). Flexible Space & Built Pedagogy: Emerging IT Embodiments. Retrieved May 10, 2012, from http://www.torinmonahan.com/papers/Inventio.html Moore, G. T., & Lackney, J. A. (1994). Educational facilities for the twenty-ﬁrst century: research analysis and design patterns. Center for Architecture and Urban Planning Research, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

References

2012

PVWatts v.2: AC Energy and Cost Savings. (n.d.). Retrieved April 11, 2012, from http:// rredc.nrel.gov/solar/calculators/PVWATTS/version2/pvwattsv2.cgi Stenftenagel, David, 2010. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/TEP_ Production/g/TEPMtgsb5-york_09082004_14.pdf The Urban Canopy | Creating a sustainable and just agricultural system. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2012, from http://www.theurbancanopy.org/ Thomas Lee Smith, 2001. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.rci-online.org/interface/200108-smith.pdf CA CHPS. (2009). Best Practices Manual, 2009 Edition (Vol. Volume II: Design for High Performance Schools). California Criteria for High Performance Schools. Retrieved from http://www.chps.net/dev/Drupal/node/288 Castle Square Tenants Organization. (2010). Castle Square Deep Energy Retroﬁt. Retrieved April 30, 2012, from http://www.castledeepenergy.com/ Castore, F. (2011, May 26). CENTRIA Formawall – Insulated Metal Panels. Retrieved May 1, 2012, from http://texasbuildsmart.com/product-reviews/centria-formawall-%E2%80%93insulated-metal-panels Centria. (2009). Recyclable to the Core. Formawall | ecoCENTRIA. Retrieved May 11, 2012, from http://eco.centria.com/formawall/fully_recyclable.aspx Gelfand, L., & Duncan, C. (2011). Sustainable Renovation: Strategies for Commercial Building Systems and Envelope (1st ed.). Wiley. Hunter Douglas Contract. (n.d.). Green Vision. Retrieved May 1, 2012, from http://www. hunterdouglascontract.com/green/green_effects.jsp?id=catWinCover Innovative Design. (2004). Guide for Daylighting Schools. Retrieved from http://www.lrc. rpi.edu/programs/daylighting/pdf/guidelines.pdf Marnakit, B. (2012, May 1). Cost of Centria Formawall Dimension Series panels. 74

CBP&D

Norris, D., & Tillett, L. (1997). Daylight and productivity: Is there a causal link? (pp. 213– 218). Presented at the Glass Processing Days Proceedings. Passive House Institute US. (2011). What is a Passive House? PHIUS. Retrieved May 11, 2012, from http://www.passivehouse.us/passiveHouse/PassiveHouseInfo.html

References

2012

Queens University, Faculty of Applied Science. (n.d.). Windows | Live Building. Live Building Integrated Learning Centre. Retrieved April 30, 2012, from http://livebuilding. queensu.ca/green_features/windows Reducing Cooling Load: Windows & Skylights. (1999).ENERGY EFFICIENCY MANUAL (pp. 919–929). D. R. Wulfinghoff. Regents of the University of Minnesota. (2011, January). The Efficient Windows Collaborative Tools for Schools. Schankula, A. (2010, May). Wood Panel Facades - Eco-refurbishment of Multi-Story Buildings. Detail Magazine, 504–505. Serra, J. (2011, August). Towards Carbon Neutrality in Existing Buildings: High Performing Enclosures for Building Renovation (Sustainable Design Synthesis Project). Carnegie Mellon University. Straube, J. (2008, September). Can Highly Glazed Building Façades Be Green? Building Science. Retrieved from http://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-006-canfully-glazed-curtainwalls-be-green/files/bsi-006_glazed_buildings_green.pdf The Efficient Windows Collaborative: Resources. (1998, 2012). Retrieved May 15, 2012, from http://www.efficientwindows.org/nfrc.cfm

CBP&D

Appendix

2012

Proforma for Doner House as if built As-is Proforma for Donner House

15-May-12 Assume all units for rent

�� Gross Building Area Total Units Parking spaces Floor Area Ratio Site Area Building Cost per square foot

63127 400.0 22 2.43 26000 $350

sq ft

sq ft per sq ft

�� Property Acquisition Closing Costs

Amount �� $390,000 $4,290,000

Comments 26000

�� Const. Costs Const. Contingency

$22,094,450 $1,104,723 ��

��

$63,127

$350 5% $368

�� Development Fees Architectural Fees Research Fees Engineering City Permits and Fees Interest During Construction Legal and Accounting Marketing Operating Reserves ��

��

$21,948,328

$1,104,723 $1,988,501 $662,834 $662,834 $12,625 $1,316,900 $10,000 $10,000 $90,138 ��

cash cash cash cash 6%

Dir. Cost x 5% Dir. Cost x 9% Dir. Cost x 9% Dir. Cost x 3% prime +1

$3,004,600

��

$510.76

�� University Land Development Fee Research Fees PV Incentive Façade Donation Glass Donation Other Donations ��

$4,290,000 $1,104,723 $662,834 $200,000 $185,000 $900,000 $1,500,000 ��

�� University Investment Commited Capital Gift Other Capital Gifts ��

$12,842,556 $1,500,000 $2,500,000 ��

��

R&D Wall Panel PPG Mech or Green House

$19,150,173 Private Donor Angel Donors

CBP&D

2012

Appendix

Proforma for Doner House as if built As-is - continued ��

��

�

��

�

��

CBP&D

2012

Proforma for Donner House

Appendix

Proforma for Donner House as if built Addition Portion Only 15-May-12 Assume all units for rent

�� Gross Building Area Total Units Parking spaces Floor Area Ratio Site Area Building Cost per square foot

50468 400.0 22 1.94 26000 $350

sq ft

sq ft per sq ft

�� Property Acquisition Closing Costs

Amount �� $390,000 $4,290,000

Comments 26000

�� Const. Costs Const. Contingency

$17,663,800 $883,190 ��

��

$50,468

$350 5% $368

�� Development Fees Architectural Fees Research Fees Engineering City Permits and Fees Interest During Construction Legal and Accounting Marketing Operating Reserves ��

��

$21,948,328

$883,190 $1,589,742 $529,914 $529,914 $10,094 $1,316,900 $10,000 $10,000 $90,138 ��

cash cash cash cash 6%

Dir. Cost x 5% Dir. Cost x 9% Dir. Cost x 9% Dir. Cost x 3% prime +1

$3,004,600

��

$533.48

�� University Land Development Fee Research Fees PV Incentive Façade Donation Glass Donation Other Donations ��

$4,290,000 $883,190 $529,914 $200,000 $185,000 $900,000 $1,500,000 ��

�� University Investment Commited Capital Gift Other Capital Gifts ��

$12,488,104 $1,500,000 $2,500,000 ��

��

R&D Wall Panel PPG Mech or Green House

$19,150,173 Private Donor Angel Donors

CBP&D

Proforma for Donner House as if built Addition Portion Only - continued ��

Appendix

2012

��

�

��

�

��

CBP&D

Proforma for Donner House as if built Full Expansion Proforma for Donner House

Appendix

2012

15-May-12

Assume all units for rent

�� Gross Building Area Total Units Parking spaces Floor Area Ratio Site Area Building Cost per square foot

113595 400.0 22 4.37 26000 $350

sq ft

sq ft per sq ft

�� Property Acquisition Closing Costs

Amount �� $390,000 $4,290,000

Comments 26000

�� Const. Costs Const. Contingency

$39,758,250 $1,987,913 ��

��

$113,595

$350 5% $368

�� Development Fees Architectural Fees Research Fees Engineering City Permits and Fees Interest During Construction Legal and Accounting Marketing Operating Reserves ��

��

$21,948,328

$1,987,913 $3,578,243 $1,192,748 $1,192,748 $22,719 $1,316,900 $10,000 $10,000 $90,138 ��

cash cash cash cash 6%

Dir. Cost x 5% Dir. Cost x 9% Dir. Cost x 9% Dir. Cost x 3% prime +1

$3,004,600

��

$470.53

�� University Land Development Fee Architectural Fees Research Fees Engineering Fee PV Incentive Façade Donation Glass Donation Other Donations ��

$4,290,000 $1,987,913 $1,789,121 $1,192,748 $596,374 $200,000 $185,000 $900,000 $1,500,000 ��

�� University Investment Commited Capital Gift Other Capital Gifts ��

$16,641,155 $1,500,000 $2,500,000 ��

��

R&D Wall Panel PPG Mech or Green House

$19,150,173 Private Donor Angel Donors

CBP&D

2012

Appendix

Proforma for Donner House as if built Full Expansion - continued ��

��

�

��

�

��

CBP&D

� ��

� � ��

�

��

� �

� ��

��

�

��

� ��

�

��

�

��

� ��

�

��

�

��

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ��

��

�

��

�

��

� ��

� � ��

�

��

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

� � ��

� � �

��

�

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

Appendix

2012

��

� � � � � � � � �

CBP&D

� ��

� � ��

�

��

� �

� ��

��

� ��

�

��

� ��

�

��

� ��

�

��

�

��

�

��

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ��

��

�

��

�

��

� ��

� � ��

�

��

� � ��

�

� ��

� � �

��

�

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

� ��

��

Appendix

2012

��

� � � � � � � � �

�

� 83