Net Positive Studio 2018-19 Research Analysis by Net Positive Studio

N E T+

STUDIO

“We design homes that are affordable, sustainable, and beautiful to strengthen and inspire urban communities.”

STU

— Net Positive Studio

Our Project The purpose of looking into the Indian Mound neighnorhood in the Historic Northeast Kansas City area is to design, propose, and develop different prototypes for affordable and sustainable net-zero housing. In addition to building a project during our time in the Net Positive Studio, these proposals could be used for future development in the neighborhood. At the beginning of the semester, the studio began work on an in-depth, and ongoing, neighborhood analysis of the Indian Mound area. We have looked at different urban conditions and opportunities the neighborhood has to offer, including researching and visiting some existing homes that are currently on the market. From our studies on the homes that are available in Indian Mound, we estimated potential costs of renovation to show how the condition of the house impacts the true “affordability” of the home. We have deduced from this, that even though houses appear to be affordable on paper, the cost to fix them and maintain them is completely unaffordable. The Indian Mound community is currently threatened by a rapid decline in the housing stock condition. Many of the homes are suffering from deferred maintenance, neglect, and nonpermitted modifications from the homeowner. These non-permitted modifications make it difficult to pass inspections that home buyers with the FHA, FNMA, or FHLMC financing must pass. Many of the properties are selling cheaply for cash, which historically alters homes in the sense that they are no longer owned, but rather rented out for the landlord’s profit. This shift in owned homes to rented homes has resulted in a decaying investment in housing in the neighborhood. For a neighborhood that has only seen one new construction permit for housing in twenty-two years, the need for a high quality, affordable, efficient, and “right-sized” home is in dire need. The Net Positive Studio will propose an efficient housing project that fits all these necessities while helping to ease housing scarcity throughout the neighborhood for residents to invest back into Indian Mound. Partnering with NEAT and the Mattie Rhodes Center, the studio will design and build an approximately 700-800 square foot house in the spring semester of 2019, utilizing prefabricated construction techniques. Once the house is prefabricated at a warehouse Kansas State University owns, the house will then be taken apart and transferred to Indian Mound. The Mattie Rhodes Center will then receive the prefabricated parts of the house and complete the rest of the building process by using their personal subcontractors. The Net Positive S tudio will still be assisting on the project when needed. Deliverables the studio will need to complete include a stamped drawing set for permitting the house, comprehensive energy simulations, constructability of prefabricated parts, and a thorough cost analysis for alternative prototypes.

Our Team The Net Positive Studio is made up of a team of sixteen, fifth-year graduate architecture students in Kansas State University’s College of Architecture, Planning and Design. We will complete a year long project- a build project for a “right-size” affordable, net positive home in the Indian Mound neighborhood- during the 2018-2019 academic year. The year includes a fall semester focused on research and schematic designs and a spring semester that focuses on design developement, construction documents, and the actual construction of the design. Our Team — Stephen Bregande Yueming Cao Christian Carter Matthew Dickman Danielle Dillaha Johnathan Disberger Kody Gabel Joe Kutter Mi Chele Lee Catherine Matthews Amber Morris Kazem Namazi Will Olds Safa Salih Andrew Wu Jessica Wyatt

Photograph of the Net Positive Studio taken at the first meeting with NEAT and the Indian Mound Neighborhood Association at Mattie Rhodes Center.

Our Partners and Collaborators This project reaches far beyond the scope of a typical academic architecture studio. Members of the Net Positive Studio will be working with a variety of professionals, educators, students from other disaplines, and people who have close ties to Indian Mound to successfully complete the design-build project at hand. Project Partners â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Kansas State University College of Architecture, Planning and Design - Department of Architecture: Michael Gibson, Associate Professor Studio Faculty and Project Leader Mattie Rhodes Center Client organization, a non-profit community center Northeast Alliance Together (NEAT): Mary Cyr, Director Community development organization aligned with Mattie Rhodes Kansas City Design Center: Vlad Krstic, Director Project will report outcome to KCDC in response to the teaching grant Additional Collaborators â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Indian Mound Neighborhood Association Leaders and members will provide feedback throughout the process BuildSMART N.A. and Prosoco N.A. Pledged to donate products and to assist the studio in incorporating prefab technology KCMO City Planning and Development Progress and outcomes will be shared with city officials KSU College of Engineering - Department of Architectural Engineering and Construction Science: Shannon Casebeer, Assistant Professor Plans to assist the project as needed with a group of engineering students

N E T+

STUDIO

Table of Contents Our Mission Our Project Our Team Our Partners and Collaborators Neighborhood Analysis A combination of analytic diagrams and maps that showcase the major findings of our research so far.

Existing Housing A cost estimation and energy analysis of homes that are on the market in Indian Mound.

Housing Archetypes A study on base housing types and how size and type effect the energy the homes use on an annual basis.

Case Study Analysis A compilation of different housing types and projects from all over the country that can set precident for our design.

Charettes A quick design brainstorm to view different housing types and designs based on our research and current ideas. Bibliography

100

Neighborhood Analysis

By studying current physical and social conditions of Indian Mound, we found patterns and insight into the workings of the neighborhood. We studied the walkability of the neighborhood in Indian Mound to find out if there was an accessibility issue between the residents and amenities. We also looked at different modes of transportation throughout the neighborhood to how they compare with one another in relation to amenities. We studied the viability of solar energy through the use of photovoltaics to understand how we can use this to our advantage in the design process. Along with determining how much roof surface was available to use photovoltaics, we also looked at shading issues that could potentially affect this as well. We also conducted a study that investigated the varied sizes of vacant parcels and who they were owned by to better understand what type of site we potentially would be working with. A study about how ownership, evictions, and crime were all related helped give us a better understand about how the neighborhood meshed with one another while relating to affordability.

2199 9% 10%

59%

19%

723 380

340

Of all the residents in Indian Mound, 59% are owned by the occupants. Of the remaining lots, 38% are rented and 3% are vacant. 10% of rental homes are owned by landlords who live elsewhere in the Kansas City area, while 9% of rentals are owned by landlords who live out of state.

Owned vs. Rented Homes in Indian Mound

5.9%

1.8 South Indian Mound

4.8%

North Indian Mound KC Metro Area 0.9 -1.4%

Rent Appreciation Rates

The average rent in Indian Mound is increasing at a rate of 4.8% for North Indian Mound and 5.9% for South Indian Mound. This is well above the rent appreciation rate of the KC Metro area, which is decreaing at a rate of -1.4%. The breakeven point, which represents the amount of time that owning is more cost-effective than renting, is only 0.9 years for Indian Mound, as opposed to the KC Metro area at 1.8 years.5

Breakeven Point (Years)

Ownership, Evictions, and Crime in Indian Mound Neighborhood Close to 60% of all homes in Indian Mound are owned by their occupants, with the remaining homes being rented, vacated, or scheduled for demolition. While many find Indian Mound a desirable neighborhood to live in, some community members have found problems with the housing market. In recent years, a large amount of evictions have taken place in the neighborhood. This displacement can cause stress on commmunities as homes fall into disrepair from negelegent landlords, vacated homes are broken into for shelter, and rental prices consistently increase. As we move forward with out project, one of our objectives is to help aleviate the scarcity in the market and provide a home that eliminates the hidden costs of renovation and reduces electricity costs to ultimately be affordable and add value to the neighborhood. 10

“It’s not like there’s not enough places to live. There’s places to live, it’s the fact that people can’t afford them”

Listed Home Price1 vs. Estimated Repair Costs

$150,000

This graph compares the cost of renovating a home versus the up front cost of purchasing the home. The middle section represents a fair deal - a low up front cost with high repair costs. Below the line are homes that are relatively low cost in addition to a low repair cost. Above the line are homes that are high cost and high repair cost - costs that the home buyer would have to invest in order to own a livable home in Indian Mound.

Estimated Renovation Costs

$125,000

$100,000

$75,000

$50,000

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

Listed Price

Purchase Quality vs. Listed Homes

Number of Listed Homes

Based on the relationship of listed price and the estimated cost of repairs, the current listed homes were organized into three categories: best deals, good deals, and bad deals. Of the available homes, 72% were categorized as bad deals, 18% good, and 10% of the deals represented the best category.

10 7 5

Best

Good

Bad

Quality of Purchase

(1,181)

In the last ten years (2008-2018) the average market value of a 1250 sf. home in Indian Mound fell from $73,700 to $60,8001. In the same period, avergage rent for a 3 bedroom home in Jackson County, MO increased from $767 to $1,1813. This is more than the inflation rate of 16.63% over the last ten years, which would amount to a 2018 rent cost of $894.559.

Value

Value vs. Time (894)

(73,700) (767)

(60,800)

2008

2018 Time

Legend Owned Rented Neighborhood Kansas City Out of State Reported Crime Evictions

51 50

96-100

101-105

0 101-105

96-100

91-95

86-90

0 81-85

81-85

66-70

61-65

76-80

5 1

56-60

46-50

41-45

36-40

31-35

26-30

20-25

76-80

71-75

106-110

51-55

Number of Parcels

41 40

Parcel Width Range (feet)

Vacant Parcels Width and Numbers 9 8

4 2

71-75

66-70

61-65

56-60

51-55

46-50

41-45

36-40

31-35

26-30

20-25

106-110

Number of Parcels

Parcel Width Range (feet)

Land Bank Parcels Width and Numbers

Vacant Parcels Study The data was collected from Kansas City parcel viewer and parcels were categorized based on their width which is one of the main factors in site selection or design. Also, the number and location of parcels owned by the Kansas City Land Bank were indicated on the map and categorized based on their width and number. Majority of vacant parcels have the width of 46-50 feet and then narrow parcels of 20-25 feet have the highest numbers. This study shows that the number of wide parcels is very low and there are about 14 parcels with the size from 61-110 feet. Among the Land Bank parcels, 20-25 and 46-50 feet wide parcels have the majority of the numbers and there is about 40 parcel with the width of 2640 feet owned by Land Bank of Kansas City. The total number of Vacant parcels is 194 that majority of 14

them are oriented from east to west and about 18 of them are in north-south orientation. For Land Bank parcel s, there are about 5 north-south parcels and 39 with the orientation of east-west. Among the total vacant parcels, 130 of them have access to the alley while there is about 25 of land Bank lots have this access. In term of number of vacant parcels in one block, block number 107 located in the northeast of the neighborhood and then block number 22 located in the south-east has the majority of vacant parcels

9% 18 North-South 34% 66 66% 130 East-West With Alley Total Parcels

178 91%

Without Alley

Vacant Parcels Orientation

194

Total Number of Vacant Parcels

11% 5 North-South

43%

57%

25 East-West 39

With Alley Land Bank Parcels

89%

Without Alley Vacant Parcels Orientation

Total Number of Land Bank Parcels

Block Number

Legend

Vacant Parcels Map with Widths Parcel Color

22 18% 107 32%

Parcel Width

20’ to 25’ 26’ to 30’ 31’ to 35’

36’ to 40’

46’ to 50’

88 94

23%

51’ to 110’ Number of Parcels on Each Block

Legend

Vacant Parcels Map with Widths Parcel Color

Parcel Width 20’ to 25’ 26’ to 30’ 31’ to 35’ 36’ to 40’ 46’ to 50’ 51’ to 110’

KANSAS CITY, MO

100

Walk Score

Bike Score

Transit Score

Walk Score

Bike Score

Transit Score

NORTH INDIAN MOUND

100

SOUTH INDIAN MOUND

100

Walk Score

Bike Score

Transit Score 0

Neighborhood Accessibility In our research of the Indian Mound neighborhood, one of the primary focuses was a study of the walkability and how accessible different amenities were to the residents. These amenities included schools, religious centers, community centers, librarys, grocery stores and the nearest post office. These locations were recorded with points on a map with an estimated 10 minute walk radius around them. The larger map highlights where the highest number of residents benefit from close proximity to amenities such as those South - Southwest of Budd Park. Comparitively, those who live closer to Indian Mound Park have less access to amenities without the use of a vehicle. Research also found that the more walkable a 18

“We definitely have a need for a grocery store. I’m driving all the way to Ward Parkway.”

neighborhood is considered, the more stable the housing market is. However, many of the sidewalks were found in a state of disrepair, and in need of being patched or torn out and replaced completely. With the repair of the sidewalks, residents would have more comfortable access to amenities, and in turn, raise the home values and the general affordability for those living inside the Indian Mound neighborhood.

Shading Benefit For two houses with the same physical properties under the sunlight, the cooling load during the summer for the house which is entirely shaded has dropped by 45%. This is kWh of electricity (i.e. fuel) so it would correlate directly to energy savings.

Solar Benefit (Neighborhood Scale) Median estimated system size and solar electricity production (kW) per viable roof.

Solar Benefit (Block Scale) By looking at energy savings from a block-scale we see that as a unit the houses used in the example block to the right would not be able to generate enough solar energy for the entire block.

Legend Access to Amenities Amenities Churches Schools Miscellaneous

45% 45% LESS MORE ENERGY SAVING

Shading Benefit

COOLING LOAD

45% MORE MORE ENERGY SAVING

For two houses with the same physical properties under the sunlight, the cooling load during the summer for the house which is entirely shaded has dropped by 45%. This is kWh of electricity (i.e. fuel) so it would correlate directly to energy savings.

SHADE

COOLING LOAD

WITH SOLAR PANEL

LESS

SHADE

Number of Roofs

1000

Solar Benefit (Neighborhood Scale)

800 600

Median estimated system size and solar electricity production (kW) per viable roof.

400

40_45

35_40

25_30

20_25

15_20

10_15

5_10

0_5

200

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Solar Benefit (Block Scale)

Estimated Savings Over 20 Years

Not Ideal

$8000

$7000

$6000

$5000

$4000

$3000

By looking at energy savings from a block-scale we see that as a unit the houses used in the example block to the right would not be able to generate enough solar energy for the entire block. $2000

Number of Houses

Rooftop Solar Capacity Distribution (kW)

Solar Energy Viability & Shading Issue The viability of solar energy for using solar panel was examined in two different scales of the neighborhood and one sample block. We used Sunroof Project made by Google so data collection and graphical plans. The block scale graph at the top corner of the board shows that among 27 houses in the block, the majority of them (8 houses) does not have enough roof surface exposed to the direct sunlight to generate solar power which can be caused by the shadings of trees surrounded the houses in the block. Also, about 12 houses receive enough solar light to generate electric power that helps them to save $6000 to $8000 over the 20 years of usage. This amount of money is the amount of saving after considering the installation cost and energy bill of the house for over 20 years. The rest of the houses in the block (6 houses) can still benefit from solar energy and can save $2000 to 22

Shadings from trees might be a challenge for using solar panel, but they can benefit from shading during the summer or hot sunny days. $5000 over the 20 years of using solar panels. The issue of shading caused by large trees in the neighborhood was one of the concerns of neighborhood citizens. In terms of energy consumption and using solar panels to produce power, shaded houses may not be able to use the solar panels effectively which they can benefit from shades during the summer or hot sunny days of the year. We simulated two similar houses in two different conditions of shaded and not shaded and found out that shaded house use 45% less cooling energy during summer in compare to the unshaded house which directly correlates to the energy usage during the summer.

Legend Estimated Saving Over 20 Years $ 2000 $ 3000 $ 4000 $ 5000 $ 6000 $ 7000 $ 8000 Not Ideal

Solar Energy Intensity Received by Each Roof in Sample Block of the Neighborhood

Sample Block

Neighborhood Analysis Conclusions

We found that the more stable a neighborhood is considered, the more stable the housing market typically is. Many of the residents do not feel comfortable accessing the amenities the neighborhood has to offer due to terrible quality most of the sidewalks. Fixing these sidewalks and improving walkability would help to raise home values and affordability. Large trees throughout the neighborhood hinders opportunities to use solar panels, which could save people anywhere from $2,000 TO $8,000 over a twenty-year period. Also, houses that were shaded during the summer had an average of 45% less energy consumption compared to non-shaded houses. Most of the parcels were around or below fifty feet wide, which left many of the sites to be long and skinny, which limits what we are able to do with our house design. We found that eviction and crime that occurred in Indian Mound had a direct impact on the affordability of the neighborhood. Stress between negligent landlords, vacated homes, and crime in the neighborhood often led to increase in rental prices which were not affordable for the residents of Indian Mound.

Existing Housing

Looking into the existing housing stock in Indian Mound, we were curious to find how conditions of listed and condemned homes relate to the value and cost needed to update the homes to a typical Kansas City standard. We visited six different houses in the neighborhood, three that were on the market and three that were condemned, to get a better understanding of the conditions of the houses. After visiting, we began working on renovation needs, cost estimating, and a thorough energy analysis to figure out what the house needed to pass financing inspections. Additionally, we studied off-the-shelf plans to compare construction and energy costs to the existing housing stock within the neighborhood.

Land Bank House #1

Indian Mound, Kansas City, MO ^ Daylight Analysis N

Axonmetric N

Daylight Factor (%)

Exploded Axonmetric N

Cost Estimate for Repair* *Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................... Demolition 01 Site Work.............................................. Cast-in-place Stair New Front Stairs 02 Foundations........................................... 03 Framing.................................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls........................................ New Siding Insulation New Windows/Doors 05 Roofing.................................................. All New Roof 06 Interiors.................................................. New Drywall/Wall System New Int. Doors New Flooring New Stair 07 Specialties............................................. New Kitchen New Bathroom 08 Mechanical........................................... New HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical................................................ 200 AMP Service Water Heater

$4,483 $26,187

$18,975 $13,472 $12,375

$5,827 $17,900

$8,907 $11,735 $5,659

General Overhead ............................. $5,276 Total................................................. $130,796 30

1,163 SF

2 Bed, 2 Bath ^

Ground Floor Plan

10' - 8 1/2"

17' - 0 7/8"

12' - 0"

14' - 2 1/4"

10' - 0"

WH 3' - 0" 8' - 0"

37' - 0 3/4"

Holes in ceiling and floor

5' - 4 1/16"

REF.

Kitchen area.

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................ $454 Cooling Energy........................ $157 Lighting Energy........................ $472

Updated Heating Energy........................ $585 Cooling Energy........................ $87 Lighting Energy........................ $217

Equipment Energy.................... $472

Equipment Energy.................... $217

Total Energy....................... $1,555

Total Energy....................... $1,106

Bathroom with no toilet, shower, or tub.

Energy Savings.................. $449 31

Land Bank House #2

Indian Mound, Kansas City, MO

Cost Estimate for Repair*

Exploded Axonmetric N

*Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................ Demolition 01 Site Work............................................ Cast-in-place Stair New Front/Back Porches 02 Foundations....................................... 03 Framing.............................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls...................................... New Siding Insulation New Windows/Doors 05 Roofing................................................ All New Roof 06 Interiors.............................................. New Drywall/Wall System New Int. Doors New Flooring New Stair 07 Specialties.......................................... New Kitchen New Bathroom 08 Mechanical......................................... New HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical............................................. 200 AMP Service Water Heater Circuits, Switches General Overhead...........................

$25,351 $277 $0 $27,449 $31,581

$8,227 $37,371

$10,295 $19,078 $9,045

$51,414

Total................................................. $220,095 32

Ground Floor Plan

Axonmetric N

1,780 SF

3 Bed, 1.5 Bath N

Second Floor Plan

Exposed ceiling from water damage showing fracturing structural beams and cracked pipework. Plaster and lath remaining show major water and mold damage.

^ Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

View looking toward top of second floor from stair landing. Roof structure shows signs of fracturing and major holes, plaster ceiling completely destroyed, remaining floor is unstable.

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................ $3,310 Cooling Energy........................ $901 Lighting Energy........................ $526

Updated Heating Energy........................ $1,852 Cooling Energy........................ $443 Lighting Energy........................ $526

Equipment Energy.................... $526

Total Energy....................... $5,264

Total Energy....................... $3,348

Hole made when exploring in the first floor diniing room. Floor shows major signs of rot due to water damage and neglect.

Energy Savings.................. $1,916 33

Land Bank House #3

Indian Mound, Kansas City, MO N

Cost Estimate for Repair*

Exploded Axonmetric N

*Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................... Demolition 01 Site Work.............................................. Re-grading Retaining Wall 02 Foundations........................................... 03 Framing.................................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls........................................ New Siding Insulation New Windows/Doors 05 Roofing.................................................. All New Roof 06 Interiors.................................................. New Drywall/Patch Plaster New Int. Doors New Flooring New Stair 07 Specialties............................................. New Kitchen New Bathroom All New Deck 08 Mechanical........................................... New HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical................................................ 200 AMP Service Water Heater

$7,655 $2,147 $1,597 $18,961 $28,020

$7,613 $39,889

$12,145

$31,930 $6,139

General Overhead............................... $56,674 Total................................................. $276,769 34

Ground Floor Plan

Axonmetric N

1,936 SF

4 Bed, 2.5 Bath ^

Second Floor Plan

Almost all of the windows in the house have been broken or removed, leaving the house exposed to the elements for years.

^ Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

The entire facade needs to be replaced and insulated.

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................ $1,919 Cooling Energy........................ $693 Lighting Energy........................ $975

Updated Heating Energy........................ $1364 Cooling Energy........................ $269 Lighting Energy........................ $975

Equipment Energy.................... $810

Total Energy....................... $4,380

Total Energy....................... $3,400

The interior needs a complete gut and rebuild as walls, floors, windows, and doorways were severly damaged.

Energy Savings.................. $980 35

Listed House #1

Indian Mound, Kansas City, MO ^ Daylight Analysis N

Axonmetric N

Daylight Factor (%)

Exploded Axonmetric N

Cost Estimate for Repair* *Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................... Demolition 01 Site Work.............................................. Re-grading Retaining Wall 02 Foundations........................................... 03 Framing.................................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls........................................ New Siding Insulation New Windows/Doors 05 Roofing.................................................. All New Roof 06 Interiors.................................................. New Drywall New Int. Doors New Flooring New Stair 07 Specialties............................................. New Kitchen New Bathroom All New Deck 08 Mechanical........................................... New HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical................................................ 200 AMP Service, Circuits Water Heater General Overhead...............................

$4,889 $2,445 $0 $10,709 $24,466

$5,255 $13,137

$11,949

$13,834 $3,225

$28,000

Total................................................. $117,915 36

1,049 SF

2 Bed, 1 Bath ^

Ground Floor Plan

N Inefficient Existing Walls

Porch issues - Sagging, structural issues, and questionable decking material; needs replaced

Kitchen in poor shape - Uneven floors, potential water damage, casework needs replaced, and missing appliances

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................ $1,747 Cooling Energy........................ $303 Lighting Energy........................ $290

Updated Heating Energy........................ $1,198 Cooling Energy........................ $163 Lighting Energy........................ $290

Equipment Energy.................... $290

Total Energy....................... $2,630

Total Energy....................... $1,941

Sitework issues - slab tilted and too close to foundation, needs torn out; poor grading. Roof issues - sagging frame, structural issues Siding needs replaced

Energy Savings.................. $689 37

Listed House #2

Indian Mound, Kansas City, MO ^

Axonmetric N

Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

Exploded Axonmetric N

Cost Estimate for Repair* *Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

$7,202

03 Framing.............................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls...................................... New Siding Insulation New Windows/Doors 05 Roofing................................................ All New Roof 06 Interiors.............................................. New Drywall/Wall System New Int. Doors New Flooring New Stair 07 Specialties.......................................... New Kitchen New Bathroom 08 Mechanical......................................... New HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical............................................. 200 AMP Service Water Heater

$13,595

$908 $0

$12,959

$5,897 $22,024

$5,995 $14,253 $110,129

General Overhead.. .......................... $28,592 Total................................................. $139,629 38

1,780 SF

3 Bed, 1.5 Bath ^

Ground Floor Plan

A festive pink strip distinguishes the house from its neighbors.

The interior needs some lovinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

Imagine the possibilitties!

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................ $1,367 Cooling Energy........................ $462 Lighting Energy........................ $227

Updated Heating Energy........................ $901 Cooling Energy........................ $291 Lighting Energy........................ $227

Equipment Energy.................... $227

Total Energy....................... $2,283

Total Energy....................... $1,645

Drywall is missing in some places.

Energy Savings.................. $638 39

Listed House #3

Indian Mound, Kansas City, MO ^ N

Ground Floor Plan

Cost Estimate for Repair*

Exploded Axonmetric N

Axonmetric N

*Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................... Demolition 01 Site Work.............................................. Regrading/New Columns 02 Foundations........................................... Addition Walls/Footings Stair Slab/Footings 03 Framing.................................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls........................................ New Exterior Wall System New Exterior Doors 05 Roofing.................................................. All New Roof 06 Interiors.................................................. New Drywall (Finished) New Stairs 07 Specialties............................................. New Kitchen/Bathroom New Appliances New Front/Back Deck 08 Mechanical........................................... New HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical................................................ New Dryer Curcuit

$5,506 $1,765 $6,000 $5,289 $15,377 $9,134 $9,067 $17,806

$16,524 $136

General Overhead............................... $26,810

Total................................................. $113,414 40

1,660 SF

3 Bed, 2 Bath Second Floor Plan

The front porch and columns needs to be replaced along with all of the siding.

Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

The back addition needs demolished and built back with a new foundation. The roof on the entire house and addition also need replaced.

The stairs and walls that surround them need to be demolished and rebuilt. Footings also need to be poured for the stairs.

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................`$936 Cooling Energy........................ $378 Lighting Energy........................ $296

Updated Heating Energy........................ $212 Cooling Energy........................ $88 Lighting Energy........................ $296

Equipment Energy.................... $296

Total Energy....................... $1,905

Total Energy....................... $892

On the NW corner of the building, regrading needs to be done.

Energy Savings.................. $1,013 41

Off-the-Shelf House #1 Cozy Cottage

Ground Floor Plan

Axonmetric N

27 ft 12 ft 15 ft

Master Bath Powder Kitchen

Master Bed

Living Area Balcony

Dining Area

120 ft 25 ft

Exploded Axonmetric N

Cost Estimate for Repair* *Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................ 01 Site Work............................................ Footing Excavation Utility Trench 02 Foundations....................................... Poured Concrete Wall Floor Slab 03 Framing.............................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls...................................... Vinyl Siding Insulation Double Hung Window 05 Roofing................................................ Gable End Roof 06 Interiors.............................................. Drywall New Doors New Flooring Risers Stairs 07 Specialties.......................................... Economy Grade Kitchen 08 Mechanical......................................... Bathroom Fixtures Gas Heating/ Cooling 09 Electrical............................................. Basic Services

$0 $8,565 $11,579 $32,230 $38,124

$1,934 $29,928

$6,928 $18,980 $4,100

General Overhead............................... $51,336 Total................................................. $250,697 42

1,414 SF

3 Bed, 2.5 Bath

Bedroom 2

Second Floor Plan

Laundry Bath

Bedroom 1

Front Facade (Facing West)

Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

Living Area

Energy Analysis

Kitchen Area

Heating Energy........................ $299 Cooling Energy........................ $60 Lighting Energy........................ $276 Equipment Energy.................... $276

Master Bedroom

Energy Savings.................. $ 911 43

Off-the-Shelf House #2 Moss Bluff

Ground Floor Plan

Axonmetric N

42' - 0"

16' - 0"

42' - 0"

11' - 0"

14' - 0"

18' - 0"

10' - 0

2' - 0"

15' - 0"

Pantry 35 SF

WIC 60 SF

Bathroom 128 SF Mater Suite 287 SF

Family Room 490 SF

Restroom 32 SF

44'

WIC

46' - 6"

57'

Bathro 76 S

Corridor 67 SF

Corridor 130 SF

48' - 6"

32' - 6"

Kitchen 179 SF

Bedroom 4 175 SF

WIC 19 SF

Flex Room 220 SF

bedroom 3 127 SF

3' - 0"

25'

46'

44'

50'

Perspective Back

Garage 539 SF

Perspective Front 10' - 0"

7' - 0"

1' - 0"

25' - 0"

10' - 0"

Cost Estimate for Repair*

Project Number Issue Date

00 Existing Conditions............................... $0

General Overhead...........................

$10,596 $21,595 $61,932 $59,173

$14,315 $60,489

$19,556 $38,650 $14,080

$93,402

Total................................................. $393,792 44

Exploded 3D

12' - 0"

13' - 0"

Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

16'

Exploded Axonmetric N

*Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

01 Site Work............................................ Foundation Footing Utility Trenching System 02 Foundations....................................... All New Foundation 03 Framing.............................................. All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls...................................... Siding Insulation Windows/Doors 05 Roofing................................................ All New Roofing 06 Interiors.............................................. Drywall/Wall System Interior Doors Flooring Stair 07 Specialties.......................................... Kitchen Bathroom 08 Mechanical......................................... HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical............................................. 200 AMP Service Water Heater

Level 1 1/8" = 1'-0"

Perspectives Project number Date Scale

7' - 0"

44' - 0"

42' - 0"

10/17/2018 11:30:58 AM

Bedroom 2 170 SF

11' - 0"

130'

Loundry 33 SF

WIC 22 SF

Pro Dat Sca

1,414 SF

3 Bed, 2.5 Bath 42' - 0"

11' - 0"

42' - 0"

14' - 0"

18' - 0"

10' - 0"

2' - 0"

16' - 0"

Second Floor Plan 15' - 0"

Pantry 35 SF

WIC 60 SF

Bathroom 128 SF Mater Suite 287 SF

Family Room 490 SF

Restroom 32 SF

WIC

Corridor 130 SF Bedroom 4 175 SF

WIC 19 SF

Flex Room 220 SF

47' - 6"

46' - 6"

38' - 0"

Bathroom 76 SF

Corridor 67 SF

48' - 6"

32' - 6"

Kitchen 179 SF

WIC 25 SF

Loundry 33 SF Bedroom 2 170 SF

WIC 22 SF

3' - 0"

bedroom 3 127 SF

9' - 6"

11' - 0"

Garage 539 SF

7' - 0"

1' - 0"

25' - 0"

10' - 0"

7' - 0"

Level 1 1/8" = 1'-0" 4'

13' - 0"

1' - 0"

Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

Floor Plan

16'

Project number Date Scale

Daylight Analysis N

Project Number Issue Date 1/8" = 1'-0"

12' - 0" 44' - 0"

42' - 0"

10/17/2018 11:30:44 AM

10' - 0"

Daylight Factor (%)

Pantry

WIC

Bathroom Mater Suite

Family Room Restroom

WIC Kitchen

Bathroom

Corridor Bedroom 4 WIC Flex Room

WIC Loundry Bedroom 2

WIC Bedroom 3

Garage

16'

Energy Analysis Heating Energy........................ $498 Cooling Energy........................ $201 Lighting Energy........................ $437 Equipment Energy.................... $437

Energy Savings.................. $1,572 45

Off-the-Shelf House #3 Plan 25

^ N

Ground Floor Plan

Cost Estimate for Repair*

Exploded Axonmetric N

Axonmetric N

*Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions................... 01 Site Work..................................... Foundation Footings Trenching System 02 Foundations................................ Floor Slab System 03 Framing....................................... All New Framing 04 Exterior Walls............................. Siding Insulation Windows/Doors 05 Roofing........................................ Gable Dormer Roof 06 Interiors....................................... Drywall Int. Doors Stairway Flooring System 07 Specialties.................................... Kitchen System 08 Mechanical.................................. HVAC Bathroom Fixtures 09 Electrical...................................... Electric system

General Overhead...........................

$0 $8,009 $4,063 $10,709 $95,787

$84,026 $8,268

$21,104 $13,999 $50,942

$95,398

Total................................................. $465,877 46

1,780 SF

3Bed, 1.5 Bath Second Floor Plan

Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

Energy Analysis Existing Heating Energy........................ $701 Cooling Energy........................ $360 Lighting Energy........................ $752 Equipment Energy.................... $752

Energy Savings.................. 2,565 47

Off-the-Shelf House #4 Twin Peaks

www.autodesk.com/revit

Ground Floor Plan

Axonmetric N

Consultant Address Address Address Phone

Living Room 19' x 10' 6"

Consultant Address Address Address Phone

Living Room 19' x 10' 6"

Consultant Address Address Address Phone

Din. Room 10' x 8'

Consultant Address Address Address Phone

Din. Room 10' x 8' Kitchen 9' x 8'

No.

Description

Date

Garage 11'8" x 20'

' - 0"

Kitchen 9' x 8'

Garage 11'8" x 20'

Owner Project Name Unnamed Date Drawn By Checked By

Scale

A101

Exploded Axonmetric N

Cost Estimate for Repair* *Cost based on RSMeans 2017 Data

00 Existing Conditions............................ 01 Site Work............................................ Foundation Footing Utility Trenching System Pavement Systems 02 Foundations....................................... Footing System Floor Slab System 03 Framing.............................................. Exterior Walls Floor/Partition Framing 04 Exterior Walls...................................... Exterior Wall Systems Windows & Doors 05 Roofing................................................ Gable Roofing 06 Interiors.............................................. Partition/Flooring System Door System Stairways System 07 Specialties.......................................... Kitchen Systems Bath Accessories Wood Deck 08 Mechanical......................................... Bathroom Fixtures HVAC system 09 Electrical............................................. Electric system

$0 $10,951

GC Overhead....................................

$84,755

$14,388 $59,561 $41,697 $11,968 $41,535

$40,490

$36,901 $14,080

Total................................................. $356,329 48

Project Number Issue Date Author Checker

10/16/2018 10:30:47 PM

Project Number

3,278 Total SF

3 Bed, 2.5 Bath

Bedroom 9'4" x 10'

Bedroom 9'4" x 10' Bath 10' x 5'

Bath 8' x 5'

Second Floor Plan

Bedroom 9'4" x 10'

Leve 9' - 1 1

Bath 10' x 5'

Leve 0' -

Bath 8' x 5'

Front Elevation

Master room 15'4" x 13'

^ Daylight Analysis N Daylight Factor (%)

Lev 9' - 1

Lev 0

Back Elevation

East Elevation

Energy Analysis Heating Energy........................ $701 Cooling Energy........................ $360 Lighting Energy........................ $752 Equipment Energy.................... $752 West Elevation

Energy Savings.................. 2,255

Per Unit.................. 1,127 49

Existing Housing Conclusions

After studying the six existing homes within the neighborhood and the off-the-shelf plans, we found that a majority of the houses within the community need quite a bit of maintenance and renovation work. Some of those houses would require a full ground-up rebuild, which would then increase the amount of money spent on the house initially by a substantial amount. The listed and condemned homes cost anywhere from $110,000 to around $200,000 just for the renovation costs. The off-the-shelf plans would cost about $200,000 or more to be built from the ground up. While this was more than the existing homes, the off-the-shelf plans offered more square footage, but the plans were not compact. After looking at all these, we found we needed to create a compact design that has a high energy efficiency rating that was more affordable for people in Indian Mound.

Housing Archetypes

When determining what size and shape of housing to strive for, we analyzed a plethora of housing sizes and types, comparing energy and daylight analysis. We investigated using energy modeling to relate energy savings across homes with various square footages. From this, we could gather enough data to figure out the appropriate square footage we would need to use in our house design for the Indian Mound neighborhood. Once we analyzed this square footage to use for our design, we could then begin to look at how to make the home affordable and sustainable. This also gave us an idea of how different housing typologies could effect affordability and sustainability.

3.1 3.01

3.0

HOUSE SIZE [sq feet]

2,400

2.9 2.8

2,000

2.7 1,600

2.6

HOUSEHOLD SIZE [person]

2,800

2.54

1,200

2.5 1975

1980

1985

1990

1995 2000

2005

2010

YEARS

2015 Average House Size

Average and Median Square Feet for New Single-Family Houses Size vs. Average U.S. Houshold Size 1973 to 2015

Median House Size Average Household Size

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 XXS XS

XL XLXL

XS2

MF3 MF4 MF6 MF9 MF12 EUI 2012

House Size vs Energy Use Comparison

EUI 1980 EUI 1920

House Size Relationship with Energy Consumption & Maintenance Cost We analyzed the relationship between the House Size and the Energy Consumption of each house in 3 different years. Also estimated the overall house maintenance cost of different house size including small house (XXS, smallest) to multi-family apartments (MF12, largest). The variety of house sizes start from 300 square feet and goes up to 700 square feet and the overall housing size goes up to 8400 square feet in multi-family residential buildings. The energy analysis was done through computer simulation used Rhino, Grasshopper, and DIVA which uses Energy Plus software as the main engine for energy analysis. Our inputs were house geometries in different sizes and types including single-family house, duplexes, and multi-family residential buildings. Then we assigned to each model 3 different materials based on the 3 different building code requirements 54

and recorded the results which are shown in the up-left corner of the board. Also calculated the amount of energy that potentially can be produced by installing solar panels on top of the roof for each building, using 265 kW solar panels. The maintenance cost estimate was based on the cost of repair or replacement of major components of the building such as sidings, flooring, roof, and windows which typically have the life cycle of 15 years and need to be replaced afterwards.

Legend Comparison of Different House Size Total Energy Usage in three different years

Total Energy Use 2012 Per Unit Energy Use 2012 Total Energy Use 1980 Per Unit Energy Use 1980 Total Energy Use1920

Per Unit Energy Use1920 Total Electricity Power Production* *Based on ower genration of 265 kW solar panel on top of each roof depending on the area of the roofs.

Housing Archetype Conclusions

After studying the energy modeling of different housing typologies, we came to the conclusion that our house we are designing should be around approximately 800 square feet for a twobedroom house. By having a square footage picked out for the house, we then found that by using high energy efficient appliances, along with energy saving techniques such as solar heat gain and natural ventilation, we could then bring the cost of utilities for the house down significantly compared to a typical home in Indian Mound. Our net positive design would then lower expenses on the home for the month, that would over time save a lot of money, sometimes in the thousand dollar range annually.

Case Study Analysis

When designing for Indian Mound, it was important to see how other places designed for affordability and sustainability in the context of housing. Each of us investigated several housing types, such as single family, multifamily, or duplexes. We kept the case study projects in the United States to get a clear idea of how efficient affordable housing projects have been implemented, rather than in other places in the world that regularly create affordable housing. Through this, we learned what could work best for Indian Mound and how to implement these ideas in this context.

Jim Vlock Building Project 2015 New Haven, CT Yale College of Architecture 2015 $130,000 (construction) $220,000 (incl. labor+gc profit)

“Cedar-clad house by Yale students could serve as a model for affordable housing.” -Dezeen First year graduate students from Yale’s School of Architecture designed and built a single-family home in a low-income neighborhood in New Haven. The Jim Vlock project series is a long-standing program in the college going back to 1967 where each year students in the college design and build an affordable home from scratch. The idea is that the cost-efficient and flexible design could act as a prototype to other sites in the area and across the country. This project emphasizes efficient space planning by utilizing a central “core” that simultaneously defines space, contains equipment and appliances, the stair, and storage needs.

Second Floor Plan

Axonometric

First Floor Plan

Section

1/2 Bath Storage

Entry

Storage Kitchen/Dining Kitchen

Living Circulation

Core Contains Built-In Needs

Core Shapes Interior Space

Subtractive Form

Star Apartments East 6th St. (Skid Row) Los Angeles, California Michae Maltzan Studio Completed 2014 $40,000,000 LEED Platinum 6 Floors 95,000 S.F.

Developed by the Skid Row Housing Trust, and designed by Michael Maltzan Studio in Los Angeles,the STAR Apartments are a 102 unit mixed-use affordable housing development with special social services for the previously-homeless provided on-site. It utilizes a hybrid construction method. The ground-level podium, which includes parking, commercial, and office programming, was constructed with cast-in-place concrete. The five floors of apartments that sit above are composed of pre-fabricated wood construction. By simply stacking the pre-fab units, the upper floors were completed much faster than expected for residential construction of this type.

Third Floor Plan

Typical Apartment

Module Construction

Exploded Axonometric

Stacked Programming

A New Norris House Norris, Tennessee University of Tennessee 2011 $88,100 (appraised) 1,046 sqft LEED Plantinum Certified

A New Norris house was designed and built by the University of Tennesseeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Design Build Evaluate Initiative. The design was inspired by the 1933 Tennessee Valley Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Norris Dam Project to provide modern and efficient homes that integrated new technologies. Built with homage to the original Norris Community, the students incorporated many technologies to aid in a healthier and economical way of living. Features of this house include a rain water collection and grey water filtration system, mini-split ductless wall units, and solar thermal hot water production. As part of the Design Build Evaluate Initiative, the house was home to a one year residency where the systems were monitored and analyzed for their performance before being auctioned off to the public.

Floor Plan

Site Plan

Longitudianl Section

Cross Section

Water System

Natural Ventilation

Trekhaus Location: Portland, Oregon Architect: Robert Hawthorne Builder: Bart Bergquist Year: 2012 Area: 1,556sq. ft. Neighborhood residential Rating Passive House

The architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s goal is to create a net-zero building with the minimum possible impact on the environment. Photovoltaic panels produce more electricity than needed, which is then donated to low-income residents of Portland. The home is completely electric and does not depend on fossil fuels. The house is split into two townhomes, each with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 155 square feet of conditioned living space, and a 125 square foot semi-conditioned workspace for creative projects. Unlike usual house plan, with the main living room at the second floor, instead of on the ground floor, gives visitors a different experience walking through the spaces.

Second Floor Plan

Public Space Circulation

First Floor Plan

Section

Heat-recovery ventilation process

Weekly energy consumption

Paradigm Pilot Project Lafayette, CO HB&A Architects 2009 3 Bed / 2 Bath First Floor: 957 sq. ft. Second Floor: 751 sq. ft. Garage: 280 sq. ft. Total Area: 1,708 sq. ft.

The idea behind the design was to create a number of innovative energy systems to give the duplex a net-zero quality. Natural daylight floods the house through the clerestory, while the summer sunlight is blocked by window solar shades. The winter sunlight still penetrates deep into the house to help with natural winter heating. All of the appliances within the house had an energy star rating, including the lighting. Each duplex was heated with a gas condensing furnace which had an annual fuel use efficiency of 96%. A thermostat with a seven day programming capability controlled the furnace. Mechanical ventilation systems were upgraded to an energy recovery ventilator in order to achieve a more sensible recovery effectiveness of 75%. A 2.2 kW roof-mounted photovoltaic array was installed on each residence.

Second Floor Plan

Side Elevation

First Floor Plan

Front Elevation

Summer Winter

Natural Daylight

Natural Ventilation

Yarmouth Way - 25 For Sale Homes Boulder, Colorado Coburn Partners Completed July 2012 $6.6M Budget $200,000 Affordability

Yarmouth Way is a mixed-income community consisting of 10 affordable and 15 market rate houses. The 1.8 acre infill site aims to provide a variety of housing types, from duplexes to single-family attached and detached. Unlike most affordable housing complexes, Yarmouth Way offer three- and fourbedroom units for families to purchase. The housing units are laid against a woonerf, an arbored lane which prioritizes pedestrian travel over motorized vehicles. Additionally, all units within Yarmouth Way adhere to Boulderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Green Points Program, providing energy efficient living. The combination of all these factors earned Yarmouth Way the 2013 Jack Kemp Workforce Housing Models of Excellence Awards.

UP UP

1 Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

Attached Townhouses 3 Level 1 1/8" = 1'-0"

3 Level 1 1/8" = 1'-0"

1 Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

2 Level 3 1/8" = 1'-0"

1 Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

2 Level 3 1/8" = 1'-0"

Semi-Detached Townhouses 2 Level 3 1 Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0"

2 Level 3 1/8" = 1'-0"

Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

Level 3 1/8" = 1'-0"

Single-Family Detached Houses

Level 3 1/8" = 1'-0"

1 Level1 2 Level 2 1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0"

Single-Family Attached Houses 2 Level2 3 Level 3 1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0"

Single-Family Detached

Single-Family Attached Semi-Detached Townhouse

Attached Townhouse

Organization of Housing Types 71

20Kv18 The Demographic Home Newbern, AL Rural Studio 2016 $20,000 2 Bed, 2 Bath

The Demographic Home is designed with the use of Zip panels to decrease labor costs while providing a tighter building envelope. The home is a 2 bed 2 bath with the ability to change the dinning room into another bedroom if needed. These rooms are separated to give each bedroom its own space to provide more privacy which is becoming more important as the standard rural household begins to change more and no longer reflects the typical nuclear family. The porch serves as the hub and main entrance while also allowing for natural light to penetrate deeper into the home.

Section

Axon

Floor Plan

Section

Natural Ventilation

Spatial Hierarchy

Openings on the homeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exterior allow permeability for the greater part of the year, creating an ideal opportunity for ventilation, and in turn keeping the home cool and cutting down on utility costs.

The Hub serves as the main gathering point for the home and a way to help cool the home. The private spaces were separated by the living spaces to accommodate for the changing landscape that makes up households today.

Hub Living Private

Empowerhouse Project 2011 Washington, D.C. Parson School of Design Budget: $250,000 Actual Cost: $229,000 2011 Solar Decathlon Winner 900 SF

This house was designed to have net-zero energy cost. Along with that, the house was designed as a single unit but with the versatility to become a duplex. “Empowerhouse illustrates The New School’s commitment to design-led civic engagement, and is a true model of affordable sustainable housing that has the potential for national as well as international replication. Due to the success of this project, Parsons is now in the planning stages of a second project to build a home with Habitat in Philadelphia.”(Parson School of Design).

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Mechanical System

Exploded Axon

Energy Recovery Ventilator (EVR)

Heat Pump Water Heater

Micro Inverter

Dryer Exhaust

Sedum Green Roof Tray

Solar Panel

Jubilee Park Affordable Housing - Gurley Place Dallas, Texas bcWORKSHOP Websites: http://www.bcworkshop.org/posts/ gurley-place-senior-housing https://www.jubileecenter.org/ houing-1/

Gurley Place was established as an affordable senior housing option that consists of a 24-unit housing project for tenants over 55. There are a total of 12 two-story buildings on a 0.9 acre site adjacent to the Jubilee Park and Community Center. The project creates affordable housing opportunities by requiring that renters’ income does not exceed 80% of the median income of the neighborhood. The units’ design will decrease the residents’ utility bills by increasing the efficiency of water and energy systems. The project utilizes LEED Gold standards as a baseline and emphasizes low water use, highly durable materials, and superior indoor air quality to ensure the longevity of the building stock.

BATHROOM

65 SF

LIVING ROOM/ KITCHEN

BEDROOM

298 SF

187 SF

CARETAKER/ STORAGE

71 SF DN

Second Floor Apartment - B Plan

Bathroom 65 SF

LIVING ROOM/ KITCHEN

Bedroom

298 SF

187 SF

CARETAKER/ STORAGE 71 SF

First Floor Apartment - A Plan

Community-Focused

Exploded Axonometric

Spatial-Awareness

McKnight Lane Project Location:Waltham, VT Architect: Pill•Maharam Architects Year:2014 Budget:$3.6 million 1 story - Duplex 2 Bedroom, 1 Bath 1050 SF

McKnight Lane is owned by a tax credit Limited partnership Addison County Community Trust (ACCT) and Cathedral Square Corporation (CSC). they joined forces to re-develop a formerly unoccupied, blighted mobile home park located in Waltham Bordering Vergennes It’s a rental community. They are fourteen net zero energy homes configured into seven duplexes and available for households with incomes at or below 50% and 60% of Area Median Income. Awards: Efficiency Vermont’s Best of the Best Merit award for innovation. VBGN - 2015 going green award

14’

75’

14” roof truss Airtight duct inside the house

First Floor Plan

1 foot overhang 5/8” sheetrock and low VOC paints Double stud walls, 10” cavity

Permanent Funding Sources People’s United Band Credit Equity $2,135.000

Vermont Community Formaldehyde-free plywood decking and sheathing 9.5” floor system

Development Program HOME Investment Partnership

$498,000

Vermont Housing & Conservation $370,000 Board $119,000 Efficiency Vermont

Frost protected foundation

VLITE

No Energy Costs

Mortgage Payment

$440,000

Clean Energy Development Fund Moisture tight underbelly

Heat and Electric

Loan Payment

$60,480 $50,000

TOTAL $3,672,480

Project Funding Sources

Monthly Cost

Pre-fabricated systems

Energy Storage

Roof mounted photovoltaic panels(PV)

Cold climate heat pump and compressor

CPTED: Crime Prevention through the built Environment There was a new law passed in Portland were all designs had Portland, Oregon to design to prevent crime. This includes Natural Surveillance, Passed: 11-26-2008 Territoriality, Access Control, Active Support, Management Website: and Maintenance. In different areas there are different https://www.portlandoregon.gov/ policies. In Portland there are rules about visibility, lighting, citycode/article/272978 public right of ways, doors, security, and much more. These laws are here to protect the people living in the area and to protect guests to the area. These laws help people to watch their children playing outside while still being productive inside. It also allows for safer streets and sidewalks.

Lighting

- Shows house number -Space lets you see who is at the door

- Appropriate spaced sidewalk and street lights to insure safety

Private vs Public - Different color and/or bricks to show difference in public and private spaces - Space between sidewalk and road so that pedestrians are safe

Private vs Public - Small elevation change to show ownership of scape.

6ft 6ft 3ft

Shrubbery Height - To allow clear view from house into yard or street.

3ft

Tree Spacing

Window Placement

- Spaced 6ft or more to still have clear views of sidewalk and street.

- On and beside the door to see who is at the door - Windows facing the front to watch the sidewalks and streets

ecoMOD4 [THRU] + ecoMOD SOUTH Townhomes Location: Charlottesville, VA Designer: University of Virginia Year: 2008-2010 Budget: $120,000 Cost: $125 per sf ($144,750 total) Size: 1,158 sf 2 Beds, 1.4 Bath Certification: LEED for Home

ecoMOD is a research and design/build/evaluate the project at the University of Virginia that aims to create a series of ecological, modular and affordable housing units. Technically, the ecoMOD SOUTH Townhomes are the derivation of ecoMOD4 design. The team tried to make visual connections that aligned through the house into the landscape (THRU) and to make the small home feel as large as possible. Geothermal and PVs were funded by the local utility, Dominion Virginia Power, and a private donation. The design was developed flexible enough to be deployed in a variety of ways such as duplex and townhomes. Partners : Habitat for Humanity Programs: Home Star,Building Star, LEAP, Virginia Sustainable Building Network. Wall Type: 1 foot depth, Spray-in Open-cell and rigid insulation, 2x6 framing, Corrugated Metal, R-30. Roof Type: Close-cell foam insulation, R-60.

Module 4 15’x8’6”

Module 2 34’x13’6”

Module 3 15’x8’6”

Second Floor Plan - 3 Bedrooms Option

Module 1 34’x13’6”

Bedroom 2 12’x12’

Bathroom 9’x7’

Bedroom 1 12’x11’

Restroom 7’x3’

Kitchen 14’x12’

Living Room 12’x10’

Porch

14’x14’

First Floor Plan - 3 Bedrooms Option

Design Process

Exploded Axonometric 2 Bedrooms Option

Options:

4 Bedrooms

2 Bedrooms 83

Gable House Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA University of Illinois 2009 807 sf. 1 bed 1 bath Images by University of Illinois

The Gable House is conceived as a synthesis of innovative, sustainable technologies and Midwestern vernacular architecture. Designed to be pre-built and shipped to its final location, the house experiments with panelization and recyclable materials. Bamboo trusses are used as the primary structure, with recovered siding and a steel roof encasing the envelope. Solar panels line the roof, optimized to maximize solar energy production. The house generates more energy than it uses in certain months to offset energy costs in the overheated and underheated periods.1

2009 Solar Decathalon of the University of Illinois.

40 solar panels line the roof to generate up to 95kw of energy. In order to be shipped to its location, the module had to fit on a truckbed and not exceed height limitations. A portion of the roof structure was removed to allow for transportation and reassembly on site.1

First Floor Plan

9 8

6 12

1. Concrete Slab on Grade 2. 2x10 Sill 3. 5/8” OSB 4. 1/2” Drywall 5. Bamboo Structure 6. Rigid Insulation 7. 2x2 Framing 8. Exterior Plywood Sheathing 9. Typar House Wrap 10. 24 GA Steel Siding 11. Treated 2x4 12. 3/4” Reclaimed Wood Siding

4 3

2 1

Detail Section

Rendered Wall Section

UB04 - 2036 Seventh Street Location: New Orleans, LA Designers: UrbanBuild, Tulane School of Architecture Year: 2009 Budget: Unknown Certification: LEED Silver Website: urbanbuild.tulane.edu

2036 Seventh Street is the fourth project in the UrbanBuild Studio Initiative. The design build studio was created in the Tulane School of Architecture as a response to the housing crisis after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005. UB04 is the first LEED certified home produced by UrbanBuild. While responding to the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new hurricane preparation requirements, a cladding system was designed for the UB04 home. The impact-resistant polycarbonate screen acted as protection and daylighting control, which helped to reduce the amount of energy that the house used. A stick-built construction allowed the studio to make revisions and alterations during the building process, unlike the pre-fabricated systems from previous UrbanBuild projects. The UB04 home was the second UrbanBuild home in the same community and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s completion sparked interest in and around the community, allowing eight more homes to be completed since.

First Floor Plan

Axonometeric

Section

South Elevation

Private Public

Shifting Cores

Void Exterior Spaces within a Volume Open vs Closed Panels

The formal layout of the home divides spaces into public and private realms, shifted along a jagged axis.

Within the volume of the home, void act as protected exterior space, allowing access to the outside and giving a larger feel to the narrow interior space.

Poly carbonate panels slide along the exterior of the facade, creating opportunities to alter daylighting, spatial enclosure, and views to the outside.

Case Study Analysis Conclusions

After looking into these different case studies, we found how each study worked on creating a sustainable, compact, and efficient design to maximize space use while giving the resident a house with little energy costs. The case studies were very helpful in beginning to think about how we wanted to implement energy efficiency to our own designs. We found many unique design and performance techniques that seemed to work well across a variety of different residence types. Some of the case studies also showed us possible construction techniques that could benefit our own construction project in the spring semester. So, when designing our house, the Studio needs to create a â&#x20AC;&#x153;right-sizeâ&#x20AC;? design that utilizes all 800 square feet, use high energy star appliances, take advantage of solar heat gain, is sustainable, and that still fits into the neighborhood fabric of Indian Mound.

Design Charettes

A design charette is defined as a fast, conceptual design method used to get architectural ideas down on paper. The pages that follow include charettes from a two hour brainstorming session. These are rough ideas based on the research that we have compiled thusfar. After seeing the ideas within the studio, we noticed there were four major typologies- a shifted home, a linear home, a modular home, and a home with a loft. Hopefully, schematic designs are sparked from this in more detail, and will eventually become the design we develop for next semester.

Shifted Plan Scheme The intent for the home was to shift the public and private spaces apart from one another to create exterior spaces on the front and back of the home. This allows for the house to react to the site creating space for gardens to be added which also adds a barrier that helps to protect the home. The shift also allows for multiple views out onto the porches and into the site to add a sense of security. When laying out the spaces, there was a desire to keep the kitchen open with the dining room while also providing views to the exterior. There should be a strong connection between the interior and exterior promoting those who live here to want to be outside enjoying the weather allowing for the home to be opened up for natural ventilation purposes. This will also help to build a sense of community again within the neighborhood and keep people from feeling secluded in their own homes. 92

Living Room 238 SF

Entry 47 SF

Bath 70 SF

Kitchen 126 SF

Bed 118 SF

Dining Room 151 SF

Bed 140 SF

Modular Plan Scheme

29' - 6"

15' - 2 15/16"

23' - 0 3/4"

REF.

23' - 0 3/4"

Lofted Plan Scheme

Linear Plan Scheme

Bibliography “Duplex House Plans, Row House Plans, D-473.” Duplex House Plans, Row House Plans, D-473. Accessed October 12, 2018. https://www.houseplans.pro/plans/plan/d-473. “Eviction in KC Town Hall.” PBS. Accessed September 02, 2018. https://www.pbs.org/video/eviction-in-kc-town-halliddzjb/. “Home - Vermod Homes -.” Vermod Homes. Accessed October 22, 2018. https://vermodhomes.com/. “Home.” Kansas CITY EVICTION PROJECT. Accessed September 02, 2018. https://www.evictionkc.org/home/. “Kansas City Walk Score.” Walk Score. Accessed October 28, 2018. https://www.walkscore.com/MO/Kansas_City. “Kansas City, MO.” USA.com. Accessed October 2018. http://www.usa.com/kansas-city-mo.htm. “Moss Bluff House Plan.” Design Basics. Accessed October 28, 2018.  https://www.designbasics.com/planview/?id=f749eabf-a787-49ba-baee-5526aaf2a874. “PLAN #79-203.” Country Style House Plan. Accessed November 02, 2018. https://bit.ly/2AGC26w. “Solar Potential Estimate.” Google Sunroof Project. Accessed October 28, 2018. https://www.google.com/get/sunroof/ data-explorer/. “Trekhaus: A Passivhaus Duplex in Oregon.” GreenBuildingAdvisor. Last modified August 10, 2018. https://www. greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/trekhaus-a-passivhaus-duplex-in-oregon. “Walkable Communities Linked to Lower Rates of Obesity and Diabetes.” Cardio Smart. Last modified July 24, 2016. https://www.cardiosmart.org/News-and-Events/2016/07/Walkable-Communities-Linked-to-Lower-Ratesof-Obesity-and-Diabetes. “20Kv18.” Rural Studio. Accessed October 25, 2018. http://www.ruralstudio.org/projects/20kv18. “A New Norris House.” Design Build Evaluate Initiative. Last modified February 5, 2015. http://dbei.utk.edu/projects/ new-norris-house/. “Affordable Housing.” Jubilee Park. Accessed December 12, 2018. https://www.jubileecenter.org/housing-1/. “Boulder, Colorado: Infill Workforce Housing ǀ HUD.” HUD User. Accessed October 26, 2018. “Cost to Install Blow-in Wall Insulation - Estimates and Prices at Howmuch.” HowMuch. Accessed November 4, 2018. https://howmuch.net/costs/insulation-wall-blowin-install. “Gurley Place Senior Housing.” bcWORKSHOP. Last modified January 11, 2013. http://www.bcworkshop.org/posts/ gurley-place-senior-housing “Kansas City Parcel Viewer”. City of Kansas City, Missouri. Accessed September 2018. http://maps.kcmo.org/apps/ parcelviewer/. “Law.” Exhibit A: City of Portland CPTED Definition and Policy Strategies. Accessed October 30, 2018. https://www. portlandoregon.gov/citycode/article/272979. “McKnight Lane Affordable Housing Development Resilient, Net-Zero, Low-Income Rental Housing in Rural Vermont.” PDF. Clean Energy Group. https://www.cleanegroup.org/wp-content/uploads/McKnight-Project-Data.pdf. “North India Mound Kansas City Real Estate.” Zillow. Accessed October 2018. https://www.zillow.com/north-indiamound-kansas-city-mo/. “Paradigm Project.” HB&A. Accessed November 4, 2018. https://www.hbaa.com/paradigm-project/. “Property Search.” Jackson County, Missouri. Accessed September 2018. https://ascendweb.jacksongov.org/ascend/ (ys1o0z55r5exuu45tfiuzu55)/search.aspx. “Star Apartments.” Michael Maltzan Architecture. Accessed November 01, 2018. https://www.mmaltzan.com/projects/ star-apartments/. “The Jim Vlock Building Project.” Yale University. Accessed October 15, 2018. http://yalearchitecture.org/buildingproject/ bp15/about.html#1. “Thistle – Affordable Housing in Boulder County.” Thistle. Accessed October 26, 2018. “Yarmouth Way Boulder, Colorado.” Urban Land Institute Terwilliger Center for Housing. Accessed October 26, 2018. http://uli.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/YarmouthWay_in-layout_Final.pdf. 2009 Solar Decathalon of the University of Illinois. “Gable Home.” Accessed October 2018. http://2009.solardecathlon. illinois.edu/. AAA. “Cost to Own a Vehicle.” AAA News Room. Last modified August 23, 2017. https://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/ cost-to-own-a-vehicle/. Abel, Michael and Erika Noguera. “Indian Mound Neighborhood Quality of Life Study: Issues, Needs, and Assets,” University of Missouri-Kansas City (July 2013). Britt, Michael. “The Design Development Set for the ecoMOD South Project.” ecoMOD Research Seminar. Accessed October 28, 2018. https://michaelbritt8100.wordpress.com/about/. City of Kansas City, Missouri. “Kansas City Parcel Viewer.” Accessed September 2018. http://maps.kcmo.org/apps/ 100

parcelviewer/. Cohen, Sacha. “Does Walkability Raise Property Values?.” Houselogic. Accessed October 28, 2018. https://www. houselogic.com/save-money-add-value/save-on-utilities/does-walkability-raise-property-values/. Dean, Jesse, and Otto VanGeet. “Design and Evaluation of a Net Zero Energy Low-Income Residential Housing Development in Lafayette, Colorado.” National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Last modified March 2012. https://www.nrel.gov/ docs/fy12osti/51450.pdf. Donalds, Samantha, Sarah Galbraith, and Todd Olinsky-Paul. “McKnight Lane Redevelopment Project.” PDF. Clean Energy Group. Last modified June 2018. https://www.cleanegroup.org/wp-content/uploads/McKnight-Lane-Case-StudyJune-2018.pdf. Douglas-Hamilton, Fiona and Bruce Millard. “ZHome - A Zero Net Energy Community.” Northwest EcoBuilding Guild. Accessed November 01, 2018. https://goo.gl/hxa9EX. Florida, Richard. “Walkability is Good for You.” Citylab. Last modified December 11, 2014. https://www.citylab.com/ design/2014/12/growing-evidence-shows-walkability-is-good-for-you-and-for-cities/383612/. Gordian. Residential Costs with RSMeans Data 2017. Maryland: Gordian RSMeans Data, 2016. https://law.wustl.edu/landuselaw/Articles/Gentle%20Infill.pdf. https://thistle.us/real-estate-development/. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/casestudies/study_01272015_1.html. Kansas City Eviction Project. “Interactive Eviction Map Jackson County.” Accessed September 2018. https://www. evictionkc.org/maps/. McCormick, Kathleen. “Gentle Infill.” Land Lines, 14-25. July 2016. Accessed October 26, 2018. McKnight, Jenna. “Cedar-clad house by Yale students could serve as a model for affordable housing.” Dezeen. Last modified November 20, 2015. https://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/20/cedar-clad-house-jim-vlock-buildingproject-yale-school-of-architecture-students-affordable-housing-usa/. Meinhold, Bridgette. “Empowerhouse Moves Beyond the Solar Decathlon to Become Real Housing in DC.” Inhabitat. Last modified December 05, 2012. https://inhabitat.com/empowerhouse-moves-beyond-the-solar-decathlon-tobecome-real-housing-in-dc/. Perry, Mark J. “New US Homes.” The American Enterprise Institute. Last modified June 5, 2016. http://www.aei.org/ publication/new-us-homes-today-are-1000-square-feet-larger-than-in-1973-and-living-space-per-person-hasnearly-doubled/. Quale, John D. Sustainable, Affordable, Prefab: The ecoMOD Project. Charlottesville and London: University of Virginia Press. 2012. Quale, John, Michael Britt, Erik De Los Reyes, and Elizabeth Rivard. “Commercializing Energy-Efficient Affordable Housing: The EcoMOD South Project.” BRIK. Last modified March 27, 2013. https://www.brikbase.org/content/ commercializing-energy-efficient-affordable-housing-ecomod-south-project. SpotCrime. “Kansas City Neighborhood Crime Maps, Statistics, Local Reports and Alerts.” Accessed September 2018. https://spotcrime.com/mo/kansas+city/neighborhoods. Styling Wizard: Google Maps APIs. Accessed October 30, 2018. https://mapstyle.withgoogle.com/. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. “Fair Market Rent Documentation System for Jackson County, MO” (2008 – 2018) Accessed October 2018. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr.html#2018_ query. Vandervort, David. “zHome.” Vandervort Architects. Accessed November 01, 2018. http://vandervort.com/multiprojects/ zhome. Zillow. “Kansas City MO Single Family Homes.” Accessed September 2018. https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/ Kansas-City-MO_rb/. Zillow. “Market Overview: Rentals. Kansas City Metro.” Zillow Real Estate Research (September 2018). Accessed October 2018. www.zillow.com/research/.

101

N E T+

STUDIO