Bents Opera House - Analysis

Bent’s Opera House - Analysis Report Created by: Sharkitects James Reynolds and Larissa Reyna

Arch Studio III: Adaptive Fall Semester 2014 - Project 2 Taught by: Professor Ming Hu. - In collaboration with: City of Medina, NY and Bero Architect

This report presents all the data collected by Sharkitects on Bent’s Opera House in order to create a comprehensive design that achieves LEED Gold certification and revitalizes an important building in this town.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Building Overview

Located in Medina, NY is a quirky three story sandstone building known as Bent’s Opera Hall. Situated about an hour between both Rochester and Buffalo, Medina is in the Niagara wine trail and has a potential for more tourism. The building is located at 444 Main St. and has a significant historic opera house on the third floor.

Erected in 1865, the Opera house was prominent for decades before becoming a Bank of America franchise. After being designated a historic building, It was donated to the New Orleans Renaissance Group, Inc in 2010.

The organization is currently expecting to restore the building while reprogramming it for a mix of uses that includes a performance center, restaurant, locally grown produce groceries shop, & a mini brewery and wine tasting cellar that could be added to the Niagara Falls wine trail.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Circulation Patterns

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Routes 63 and 31 cut through the middle of the city and become the most important streets: Main Street (N-S) and Center street (W-E), featuring wide sections and angled street parking travel along an interrupted line of historical storefronts with regular parking on the back of the buildings.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Circulation Patterns

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Scored 73 out of 100 in walkscore.com, Medina is classified as a very walkable city were most errands can be accomplished by foot.

The diversity found in its core of shops, churches, restaurants and culture along a 1/4 mile radius makes it classify as walkable, even though the streets cape its planned around cars and not pedestrians.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Climate Analysis

Summer Winds

Rochester Greater Rochester I, USA (43.1, -77.7) - 1st June to 31st August

Predominant winds come from the Southwest at 20 km/hr.

With a relative humidity of 80-95% humid.

An average temperature of 20 degrees Celsius.

And 280 mm of rain.

Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Climate Analysis

Winter Winds

Rochester Greater Rochester I, USA (43.1, -77.7) - 1st December to 28th February

Predominant winds come from the West at 35 km/hr.

With a relative humidity of 80-95% humid.

An average temperature of 0 degrees Celsius.

And 280 mm of rain.

Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Climate Analysis

Summer Shadows

Rochester Greater Rochester I, USA (43.1, -77.7) - 1st June to 31st

The existing building West facade is always in shadow since it is adjacent to other buildings, while the Northern facade’s 3rd floor receives sun all the time.

The Southern facade is under shadows all the time while the East facade receives some sun in the mornings.

Summer Solar Access Analysis 2nd and 3rd floor on the East Facade receives 45,300 wh/m2 of sunlight during the summer days While first floor as is partially covered receives 30,200 wh/m2 of sunlight.

2nd and 3rd floor on the South facade receive 60,400 wh/m2 of sunlight and its first floor 45,300 wh/m2.

Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Climate Analysis

Winter Shadows

Rochester Greater Rochester I, USA (43.1, -77.7) - 1st December to 28th February

The existing building Northern and West facade are always under shadow.

The Southern facade receives sun on the third and second floor all the time while the East facade receives some sun in the mornings.

Winter Solar Access Analysis 2nd and 3rd floor on the East Facade receive 75,000 wh/m2 of sunlight during the summer days While first floor as is partially covered receives 45,300 wh/m2 of sunlight.

2nd and 3rd floor on the South facade receive 151,000 and 135,900 wh/m2 respectively of sunlight and its first floor 75,000 wh/m2.

Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Building Existing Conditions

Daylight Analysis

LEED 2009 - 9am to 3pm September

The compartmentalization of the building in the basement, first and second floor is evident, preventing light to access the Northern bays.

The basement receives no natural light as it is completely enclosed, the first floor receives natural light in 63% of the surface, 58% of the surface on the second floor is natural lit, while the third floor gets the higher percentage of 79%.

Basement floors are not required to be calculated for LEED purposes. The building average surface lit is 66%. LEED v3 (2009) requires 75% of the floor surface to be covered in natural light with levels above the 300 lux. As on a 9% increment in natural lit surface must be achieved in order to obtain this credit.

Diagram Data extracted from the Revit 2015 Daylight Analysis.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

LIGHT MEASUREMENTS

All numbers in Conditions LUX Building Existing LIGHT MEASUREMENTS All numbers in LUX

0

0

0

0

0 0

1200

465

14

465 3

14

55 0

0

0

2

55

15

330

1200 1999

48

6

1999

48

240 3

140

22 9

140 103

22

3

80

3

80

15

103 232 64

232 1300 175

64

240 3

15

6

330 102

2

3 0

270 112 270 112 102

0 0 0 0

9

180 180 150

15

37 4137 4 41 115 4

850

200

175 150 1100 115 1300 127 1400 1300 1200

850

200

1100 1200 127 1400 1300

BASEMENT

FIRST

SECOND

THIRD

MEZZANINE

BASEMENT

FIRST

SECOND

THIRD

MEZZANINE

Light measurements

Data collected on site on 10/10/14 - All numbers in LUX

Basement: presents no signal of light since it is completely enclosed.

First: in general low quality of light. High numbers are perceived near glassed areas.

Second: bay on the left presents high amount of lighting while the central and right bay needs improvement. (Working area avg lux requirements = 400 LUX) Third: well lit in 80% of the space, levels decrease as non-glassed areas are approached.

All numbers in LUX Mezzanine: low quality of light, average below 100 LUX.

LIGHT MEASUREMENTS TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS All numbers in °F

0

1200

0

61

59.5

60 61

0 61.5

61.5

59.8

465 77

59

0

61.5

59

57

60

58.8 0 60 58.5 0

14 61.5

3

60

62.50

63

59

60.5

55 60

BASEMENT BASEMENT

60

15

2 60

FIRST FIRST

Temperature measurements

61.5 102

6 58

57.5

58

48

60

59

60232

62.5

180 59

200 56

59

SECOND SECOND

150

140

22 57

3

80 55

60 103

57

15

5837 53

41

57

1300 175 850 61 59

9

1999

56.5

64 58 59

83.5 57.5

58

70 330

240 3 59.8 59

270 112 62

54

4

115

55 1100 1200 127 1400 1300 63 62 57 60 58

THIRD THIRD

MEZZANINE MEZZANINE

Data collected on site on 10/10/14 - All numbers in Fahren-

Lower temperatures were collected on the Northern side, where the building presents no windows and it’s adjacenct to other buildings. The difference of temperature between the Southern Bay and the Northern bay is solely 2 grades, a small difference taking into account the amount of sun received by the Southern bay. This suggest that the envelope is rapidly loosing the gained heat, therefore not working efficiently.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Climate Analysis

Summer Psychometric Chart

Rochester Greater Rochester I, USA (43.1, -77.7) - 1st June to 31st August

Summer times in Rochester are most of the time inside the comfort zone.

Though as seen in this chart, Humidity level reaches 20% and temperatures rises up to 35 degrees Celsius.

According to this chart the most effective technique to achieve comfort levels is natural ventilation.

Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Climate Analysis

Winter Psychometric Chart

Rochester Greater Rochester I, USA (43.1, -77.7) - 1st December to 28th February

Winter’s temperature average is -1.5 degrees Celsius with high levels of relative humidity, placing this weather outside the comfort zone 100% of the time.

Several techniques could be implemented to move this placement near the comfort zone, such as exposed mass and night purge, and thermal mass, but the most effective would be solar passive heating if aided with super insulation.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Action Plan / Design Goals The main issues identified with this building where the compartmentalization of the space and the envelope’s leakiness. In order to solve this, the next changes will be implemented in the core, structure and envelope: Improve the building’s envelope performance.

Super insulating the interior to provide a high R-value while silmutaneously sealing up any leaks. Providing double glazing behind each existing window to have triple glazed windows.

Improve Daylight levels inside building.

Adding a new set of windows on the third floor Northern facade.

Creating a opening in the Southern facade.

Improve Connectivity withing the bays.

Creating openings in the existing bearing walls Improve Air Quality and Spaces Connectivity.

Utilizing this new void space to allow a sharing of air volume between floors as well as views of the programming between floors.

Note: The punching of floor and walls represent a 9% of the building’s floor and wall surface.

BAY2

91% OF EXISTING CORE AND SHELL REMAIN

BAY1

16% LVL2 FLOOR REMOVAL 25% LVL1 FLOOR REMOVAL

South Fac

ade

10% FACADE REMOVAL 40% BAY 1 WALL REMOVAL 10% BAY2 WALL REMOVAL

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

COMP

ARTM

ENTALI

ZED

by: Sharkitects.

LEED Energy and Atmosphere One of the main goals for this project is improving the building’s performance by creating an air volume that shares services such as heating, cooling and lighting and maintaining them inside the building’s envelope by highly insulating it. Therefore the LEED category that covers most of our goals is Energy and Atmosphere.

This category is composed by nine categories from which three are prerequisites to obtain the certification.

Prerequisite #1. Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems.

This credit’s goal is to ensure that every energy relates system is well thought ahead and implemented in the most effective way possible.

As an intensive analysis of existing conditions and lighting, heating/cooling, energy generation options was executed and some implemented in the final design this requisite is being assumed as Accomplished.

Prerequisite #2. Minimum Energy Performance.

This credit’s goal is to establish a minimum level of energy efficiency, to reduce costs and environmental impact. It requires to demonstrate 10 or 5% improvement from the base model.

This project presents percentages larger than 10% therefore this calculation will be shown later in this document.

Prerequisite #3. Fundamental Refrigerant Management.

None of the HVCA or any systems utilizes CFC- based refrigerants. .

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

LEED Energy and Atmosphere Credit #1. Optimize Energy Performance.

The projects present a 80% of improvement in energy performance, this will be proved in the energy analysis section of this report.

Taking advantage of the heat loss generated by the microbrewery counts as self supplied energy that reduces environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use. At the temperature of 75 Celsius, an approximate of 130,000 kWh of heat is lost per week during the brewing process of a small brewery. This heat will be recollected and utilized to heat the volume of air in the building, an average reduction of 8% energy required to heat the space during the months of October to May (70% of the year) is achieved by doing this.

The implementation of the PARANS systems utilizes the sun to naturally illuminate 50% of the interior space, where openings to let natural light in were impossible to achieve. The resulting is a building with 0% of artificial lighting during the day, a 40% reduction in the lighting energy consumption .

Credit #2. On-Site Renewable Energy.

No energy is produced on-site.

Credit #3. Enhanced Commissioning.

The commissioning process is assumed to have started early for this project utilizing the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction, 2009 edition.

Anthony Engineering Services is the entity in charge of this credit.

Credit #4. Enhanced Refrigerant Management.

No harmfull refrigerants are utilized by any of this building’s system.

Credit #5. Measurement and Verification.

The mayor of the town has agreed to implement a plan of measurement and verification to determine the building’s real energy savings. A monthly system software checkup will be implemented and a small report demonstrating the consumption of each floor and the source (Lights, HVAC, Outlets..) And noting any abnormal usage of the space during the month.

Credit #6. Green Power.

A 2 year contract with a local bio gas plant has been signed and its intended to provide 50% of the energy utilized, the bio waste from the brewery will be sent to this plant and this merchandise exchange will cover for 20% of the electrical wage.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

Y 1 1 2 1

Credit 3

Credit 2

Credit 1.2

Credit 1.1

Prereq 1

Possible Points:

Storage and Collection of Recyclables Building Reuse—Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof Building Reuse—Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements Construction Waste Management Materials Reuse

Materials and Resources

10

Credit 5

Credit 4

Credit 3

Credit 2

Possible Points:

Possible Points:

Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems Minimum Energy Performance Fundamental Refrigerant Management Optimize Energy Performance On-Site Renewable Energy Enhanced Commissioning Enhanced Refrigerant Management Measurement and Verification Green Power

Credit 6

x

Credit 1

Prereq 3

Prereq 2

Prereq 1

2 2 2 1

Y Y Y 19

Energy and Atmosphere

26

Credit 2

Credit 1

Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction Water Efficient Landscaping Innovative Wastewater Technologies Water Use Reduction

Credit 3

x x

Prereq 1

3

Y

Possible Points:

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Site Selection Development Density and Community Connectivity Brownfield Redevelopment Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access Alternative Transportation—Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat Site Development—Maximize Open Space Stormwater Design—Quantity Control Stormwater Design—Quality Control Heat Island Effect—Non-roof Heat Island Effect—Roof Light Pollution Reduction

Water Efficiency

Credit 7.2

Credit 7.1

Credit 6.2

Credit 6.1

Credit 5.2

Credit 5.1

Credit 4.4

Credit 4.3

Credit 4.2

Credit 4.1

Credit 3

Credit 2

Credit 1

Prereq 1

Sustainable Sites

3

x x x

x

x

N

Credit 8

?

1 1 1

1 1

6 1

Y 1 5

Y

18

Project Checklist

1 to 3 1 1 to 2 1 to 2

14

1 to 19 1 to 7 2 2 3 2

35

2 to 4 2 2 to 4

10

1 5 1 6 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

26

LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations

80

1 1 1

3

1 1 1 1 1 1

6

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Y Y 1 1 1 1 1 1

14

2 1 1 1

Y

?

x

N

Recycled Content Regional Materials Rapidly Renewable Materials Certified Wood

Regional Regional Regional Regional

Specific Specific Specific Specific

Silver 50 to 59 points

Priority: Priority: Priority: Priority:

Certified 40 to 49 points

Total

Credit 1.4

Credit 1.3

Credit 1.2

Credit 1.1

Credit Credit Credit Credit

Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title Innovation in Design: Specific Title LEED Accredited Professional

Regional Priority Credits

Credit 2

Credit 1.5

Credit 1.4

Credit 1.3

Credit 1.2

Credit 1.1

Possible Points:

Gold 60 to 79 points

1 1 1 1 1 1

6

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

15

1 to 2 1 to 2 1 1

Platinum 80 to 110

Possible Points: 110

1 1 1 1

Possible Points: 4

Possible Points:

Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring Increased Ventilation Construction IAQ Management Plan—During Construction Construction IAQ Management Plan—Before Occupancy Low-Emitting Materials—Adhesives and Sealants Low-Emitting Materials—Paints and Coatings Low-Emitting Materials—Flooring Systems Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control Controllability of Systems—Lighting Controllability of Systems—Thermal Comfort Thermal Comfort—Design Thermal Comfort—Verification Daylight and Views—Daylight Daylight and Views—Views

Innovation and Design Process

Credit 8.2

Credit 8.1

Credit 7.2

Credit 7.1

Credit 6.2

Credit 6.1

Credit 5

Credit 4.4

Credit 4.3

Credit 4.2

Credit 4.1

Credit 3.2

Credit 3.1

Credit 2

Credit 1

Prereq 2

Prereq 1

Indoor Environmental Quality

Credit 7

Credit 6

Credit 5

Credit 4

Materials and Resources, Continued

Date

Project Name

LEED Score Card

by: Sharkitects.

Envelope Improvement - Insulation ZIP Panels system.

The existing envelope will be covered on the inside with this layered system which is composed of: Continuous foam insulation provides higher R-value • Increases thermal performance • Eliminates thermal bridging • Designed to meet new energy codes Engineered Wood Provides Structure and Durability • Uses the same resins and technology as AdvanTech® subfloor Built-In Water Resistive Barrier Eliminates Housewrap and Felt • Helps avoid costly rework • Instant rough dry-in with 180-day exposure guarantee • Optimal permeance allows panel to breathe and dry out Continuous Air Barrier Creates Greater Energy Efficiency • Decreases unwanted air leakage • Helps protect insulation R-value ZIP System™ Tape Permanently Seals All Panel Seams • Acrylic formulation provides superior adhesion • Rigorously tested for lasting performance • Easily applied with tape gun and accessories The increase of insulation in this buildining benefits the envelope by increasing the efficiency of the HVAC system at the tradeoff of higher upfront construction costs.

Each 1.5” provides an R value of 6.6, installing 5 layers will result in a R value of 33.

A quick calculation will provide information on the economic impact of chosing this solution: 52,4550(total sf) / 32(sf per zip panel) = 1,640 Panels 1,640 X $12 (bulk cost per panel) = $21,300 1,640 X $10 (Installation per panel) = $16,400 Total Cost = $40,000 The projected annual savings on HVAC use in the improved envelope totals $14,000, giving a ROI of only 2.25 years DETAIL SECTION A SCALE: 1/4” = 1’

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Daylight Improvement - Analysis Existing Building Conditions.

Walls and Floor Openings.

PARANS system.

Lighting Analysis Floor Schedule including PARANS systems.

LEED IEQc8.1 Whole Building Results Average areas of: 9am:55% within, 3pm 50% within.

Name

Floor Area Included in Daylighting

Basement

5294 SF

0

0%

736 SF

13%

1300 SF

25%

Level1

4529 SF

3399

63%

2870 SF

63%

3500 SF

77%

Level 2

5292 SF

4306

59%

2900 SF

55%

3950 SF

75%

Level 3

5460 SF

4749

78%

4400 SF

80% N/A

Existing

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

Openings

with PARANS

80%

by: Sharkitects.

Daylight Improvement - Analysis Decompartmentalizing the building allows the light to illuminate longer distances.

Breaking the floor provides a 13% of surface illuminated and allows light to flow in the basement making it part of the program and not a forgotten piece.

The PARANS system is a necessity as the Northern wall is blocked by buildings, is very important to get natural light in the entire building, especially in the brewery where its health benefits could improve the beer production.

It’s important to note that LEED v3 does not require service areas to be calculated withing the daylight analysis. Thought lighting is an important aspect of this design and as these areas are located within the Northern bay (the bay with less daylighting during the existing building analysis), it was not ethical to exclude it from the analysis.

Instead, the entire building surface, excluding the emergency stairwall, was calculated during the analysis

PARANS SP3 SOLAR RECEIVER: Light input to fiberoptic cables

FIBEROPTIC CABLES: Embedded within new interior wall

SECTION B

SCALE: 3/16” = 1’- 0”

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Daylight Improvement - PARANS The PARANS systems captures the sun rays with an external receiver and directs them to inside spaces through a fiber optic cable (as seen in the previous diagram). It offers a hybrid luminaire where a LED light replaces the natural light output whenever the levels get too low.

To each Parans receiver, six solar cables are attached and 3 medium fixtures are supplied with one receiver. The luminaire provide an output of 1020 lm. (natural light) if installed with a 15m long optic cable.

Two models of lightfixtures were chosen to be embeded in the new insulation layer, a spotlight located at the top of an opening aiming at some flowers for a warmer feeling, and the L2 fixture that will be simulating a window on the wall and provides a higher spectrum of light.

PARANS SOLAR SPOTLIGHT Hybrid Naural Light - LED Direct Light Output 510 LM

The wiring will be run through the air gap between the insulation panels and the existing wall as show in detail section B.

FIBER OPTIC CABLES Fiber Optic Cables bring Natural light Inside.

PARANS SOLAR L1 FIXTURE Hybrid Natural Light - LED Difussed Light Output 510 LM

DETAIL SECTION B SCALE: 3/4” = 1’

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Energy Savings In order to prove the efficiency of the design an energy simulation was run utilizing Revit and Green Building Studio software. This analysis compares the energy efficiency of existing building conditions and the new proposed conditions.

Some assumptions regarding the electricity’s wage and the usage of a regular duct HVAC system were assumed by the software.

The existing building enevelope was assumed to be high mass with mild insulation and clear single pane glazing. New openings in the exterior walls were not included in this base model.

The proposed envelope was assumed as SIP panels of 8� which provides an R value of 30, very close to the proposed R value, super insulated triple glazed windows and the new wall openings were added into the model.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Energy Savings

By applying all these Techniques the building presented an 80% decrease in its energy consumption, and a 62% decrease in its energy bill. These two numbers are not the same because of the purchase of a more expensive but less polluting fuel source. (natural gas.)

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Conclusion Overall, the superinsulation of Bents opera house provided an energy savings of 80% annually. This projected performance enhancement, with such a low return on investment, seems like an extremely viable option for usage. To decrease the use of additional HVAC ductwork and building disturbance, the approach to create one single volume of air was used. This somewhat unorthadox approach lended itself to exploring new ideas on how to interact with historic preservation while attaining sustainability goals. Since energy reduction tends to produce the most incentive to potential clients through the energy savings, it seems like the most practical solution to re-integrating the building back into the current generation while maintaining a majority of the facade and shell.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report

by: Sharkitects.