J. Connard Environmental Portfolio

ENVIRONMENTAL PORTFOLIO

SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS

JACKIE CONNARD | SPRING ‘22

SECTION 01 - INTRODUCTION

> About Me 4

> My Carbon & Ecological Footprint 5

SECTION 02 - DESIGN FUNDAMENTALS

> Site Analysis 6

> Proposed Design 7

SECTION 03 - REGIONAL & SOCIAL IMPACTS

> Regional Precedent, Materials & Demographics 8 - 12

> Circulation & Interaction 13 - 14

SECTION 04 - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

> Solar Analysis 15 - 20

> Materias 21

> Material Assembly Analysis (Tally) 22 - 25

> Environmental Product Declarations (EC3) 26 - 29

SECTION 05 - COTE SUPER SPREADSHEET

> COTE Framework for Design Excellence 30 - 49

ABOUT ME

JACKIE CONNARD

LOCATION

Dublin, Pennsylvania

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

Architectural Designer (8+ years)

Ellen Happ Architect, Doylestown, PA

EDUCATION

B.S. in Neuroscience (2010) Brown University, Providence, RI

Pursuing M.Arch

Boston Architectural College

VOLUNTEERING

Dublin Borough Zoning Hearing Board

Volunteer board member

INTERESTS

Gardening, growing my own food, traveling, coaching field hockey

My name is Jackie Connard and I am an architectural designer from Bucks County, Pennsylvania. I graduated from Brown University in 2010 with a degree in Neuroscience before pursuing a career change into the field of residential architecture.

In 2013 I completed my first year of my M.Arch degree at the Boston Architectural College and started working for Ellen Happ Architect, where I have become a project manager. I re-enrolled in the spring of 2021 to complete my M.Arch with the goal of becoming a registered architect.

The majority of my professional work is high-end custom residential design: additions, renovations and new homes. While I love the work that we do, my goal is

to incorporate more sustainable design elements into my practice. I have collaborated with certified passive house consultants (CPHC) and have considered pursuing this path in the future.

In my personal life, I am focused on sustainability where it feels important to me. I raise chickens for eggs and keep bees for honey and pollination. I have a large organic food plot that provides fruit and vegetables throughout the warm months and canned goods throughout the year. I air-dry my laundry and ride my bike to the local dairy and bakery. Through all of this, I hope to provide a good example to my two young children.

JACKIE CONNARD

MY CARBON & ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT

According to my carbon footprint calculator, my household emissions are lower than the U.S. average, which is 64,946 lbs for a household of 4 people.

My current total is 43,545 lbs. My emissions from home energy make up the majority but transportation is also a significant contributor. Living in a small town limits my transportation options and I rely heavily on automobile transport.

According to my ecological footprint calculator, my Earth Overshoot Day is:

April 19

which marks the date when humanity has exhausted nature’s resources for the year. This means that for nearly 60% of the year I am maintaining my ecological defecit by drawing down local resource stocks, essentially stealing from the next generation.

1

| JACKIE CONNARD

SITE ANALYSIS

LOCATION

25 Calumet St, Boston MA

PROGRAM

Arts and Crafts Museum & Maker Space

DESCRIPTION

This is a preliminary design for an arts and crafts museum space located along Huntington Avenue in the Mission Hill neighborhood of Boston. It serves as both production and exhibit space, and provides needed community space. Resources should be locally sourced and elements of the building should be creatively repurposed where possible.

The site is in a densely occupied urban area of Mission Hill. There is limited green space, and heavy pedestrain, vehicle and train transit.

The design should consider how to bring life back into the site, which is currently an asphalt parking lot.

Environmental design considerations include solar access, passive heating and cooling, restoring air quality with abundant trees and plantings and site specific material choices.

Site Analysis Diagrams

Site Analysis Sketch

JACKIE CONNARD

REGIONAL & HISTORIC DESIGN PRECEDENT

Being one of the oldest cities in the US, Boston has a diverse collection of old and new architecture and design.

Early architecture was heavily influenced by English roots and colonial-style building was common. Georgian and Federal building types from later in the 18th century are also typical in Boston.

As styles and tastes morphed over time, development in Boston followed.

Common historic building materials in Boston are granite and brick.

Art museum in Boston with beautifully landscaped courtyard pictured above

Boston’s Old State House (1713)

The oldest surviving public building in Boston, the Old State House provides an example of a Georgian style brick building that is typical of Boston.

It is surrounded by newer and larger scale financial buildings composed of stone and steel and glass.

Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum

JACKIE CONNARD

REGIONAL MATERIALS

BRICK

MARBLE

Early building in the Boston area was typically constructed of locally sourced timber and stone which was readily available and brick that was shipped from England as ballast.

When the need for brick outpaced the supply coming from England, clay for bricks was sourced in Medford, MA, about 6 miles northwest of Boston.

Morin Brick manufactures waterstruck brick in Maine and is used in bulding projects throughout New England .

The Vermont Danby Quarry is the largest underground marble quarry in the world, located 165 miles from Boston.

STEEL

CONCRETE

Structural steel is manufactured throughout New England:

Village Force Inc. in Hyde Park, MA

NE Stainless Steel in Weymouth, MA

Cives Steel Company in Augusta, ME

Concrete is also manufactured throughout the greater Boston area:

Boston Sand and Gravel, just north of Boston

Coastal Cement Corporation in Boston

Boston Concrete in Lowell, MA

JACKIE CONNARD

DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY - BOSTON, MA

POPULATION BASICS

Population: 694,000 (& increasing)

Households: 270,000

Avg. Persons per Household: 2.36

Population Densith: 12,800 people/sq. mi

Avg. Persons per Household: 2.36

Median Age: 32.6 years

ECONOMIC

ETHNICITY

Median Household income: $79,000

Percent living in poverty: 18.9%

Income Inequality: 0.481 on Gini Index

Average Male Salary: $90,776

Average Female Salary: $70,026

Largest Industries: Healthcare and Social Assistance, professional, Scientific & Technical Services

White (non-Hispanic): 44.9%

Black/African American: 22.2%

Asian: 9.63%

White (Hispanic): 8.28%

Other (Hispanic): 4.78%

37% of residents speak a non-English language as their primary language 86.2% of residents are U.S. citizens 27.9% of residents are foreign-born

HOUSING & TRANSPORTATION

Median Property Value: $627,000 (2.61 times the national averag)

Rate of Homeownership: 34.7% (national average is 64.1%)

Car Ownership: Average 1 car per household, less than the national average

Commuter Statistics: 36.9% drive alone 32.0% use public transit

JACKIE

WALKABILITY STUDY - BOSTON, MA

WALKABILITY

BIKEABILITY

Of the 50 largest cities in the United States, Boston consistently ranks third for walkability. Because it was largely established and developed before the automobile, its city blocks accommodate a pedestrian scale.

Walkability scores are based on facotrs including available walking routes, number and availabilty of nearby amenities, pedestrian friendliness, population density and neighborhood boundaries.

Boston typically ranks in the top 5-10 cities for bikeability. Many of the same factors that influence walkability also influence bikeability.

Bikeability is determined by infrastructure in place (trails, bike paths, inter-connected networks of barrier protected travel lanes) as well as topography, climate, and safety.

Green regions on the map indicate increased walkability

JACKIE CONNARD

HOW

THE DESIGN EMBODIES

The Arts and Crafts Museum at 25 Calumet Street in Boston is located at an interesting node along Huntington Avenue.

To the south, east and west it is bound by the dense neighborhood of Mission Hill, which is a lower-income residential area with a relatively young and diverse population.

To the north, across Huntington Aveneue is a more developed area which is defined by its medical centers, education hubs, and cultural institutions and museums.

The Museum has the potential to bridge the two neighborhoods: to be enjoyed and utilized by both Mission Hill residents and people who are in the neighborhood for work or to visit a medical or educational building in the vicinity.

THE REGION WHERE IT’S LOCATED

The site is currently occupied by a parking lot so immediately by transforming it into anything else, the design will emphasize community over automobiles. It is located along several bus lines and a T line, and easily accessible by pedestrians or cyclists.

The design serves the community in diverse ways becuase it offers a multitude of uses: It is a maker-space for local artists and craftspeople. The central courtyard provides a public green space for use by the local community and visitors. It houses a rooftop cafe and restaurant that offer a spot for relaxation and socialization. It contains an auditorium that can be used as a theater or public speaking venue. Finally, it is a place of respite for people to visit and admire locally crafted artwork.

CIRCULATION STUDY

TOTAL NET OCCUPPIABLE AREA: 41,955 SF (including central courtyard)

TOTAL AREA OF CIRCULATION: 12,972 SF (green hatched area at right) 30.91% of building area

AREA OF CIRCULATION, MINUS GALLERY SPACE: 2,298 SF 5.48% of building area

In studying the economy of this design, I examined the percentage of building area devoted to circulation to test whether the overall bulding area could be reduced. The circulation area seems high, at over 30% of building area. However, 82% of this circulation area is gallery space. The area of this building that is strictly circulation space (stairwell, elevator, hallways outside bathrooms, etc.) is limited to 5.48% of total bulding area. The basis of the museum design is to take visitors along a guided journey through the space, with alternating experiences of views of the central courtyard, walking through concealed gallery spaces, and views into the artisans’ workshops.

ROOF PLAN

As a community resource, the design also incorporates a theater, rooftop restaurant and green space, and public courtyard garden. Direct circulation to these points is available to visitors who are bypassing the exhibit portion of the design.

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

HEAT MAP OF USER INTERACTION

PRIMARY POINTS OF INTERACTION:

Ticketing, entry lobby, central courtyard, grand spiral stair, museum shop, rooftop restaurant, roof garden, theater

POINTS OF LEAST INTERACTION:

Gallery space, storage room, toilet rooms, back of house offices, portions of artisans’ workshop spaces

Gallery exhibit spaces were designed as narrow passageways with no windows to eliminate distractions of the exterior and direct visitors’ attention to the artwork on display. This is an area of decreased interaction as users’ pass through and observe somewhat quietly.

When the exhibit space ends, the design opens up with views to the central courtyard and provides space for interaction between visitors and artisans in their studios. The various levels of the museum allow for an undulating experience of quiet observation with minimal interaction and then opening to encourage interaction.

ROOF PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

JACKIE

SOLAR SHADING

SOUTHEAST ELEVATION

Analysis: The southeast elevation will require some sun shading to protect from the direct sunlight on the hottest days.

A horizontal shading device above southeast facing windows, angled at 50 degrees, will block summer sun throughout much of the day while still allowing the sunlight into the building during the winter months when the sun is at a lower angle.

IMAGE: Caption Caption

NORTHEAST ELEVATION

Analysis: The northeast elevation will require no horizontal or vertical shading to limit sun exposure.

In Boston the majority of the year is cold weather so heat gain from the sun is a benefit on most days.

Additionally, the only northeast elevation in the design is an interior courtyard wall where light and views should be maximized.

JACKIE CONNARD

NORTHWEST ELEVATION

Analysis: The northwest elevation will require no horizontal or vertical shading to limit sun exposure.

The northwest elevation faces uphill towards a 3-story building so much of it is already shaded. The buffer space between the proposed design and the existing 3-story building will be planted with trees and other vegetation that will further limit the sun exposure through any windows on this facade. Finally, the interior space here is primarily bathrooms and exhibit space where little direct sunlight is desired.

IMAGE: Caption Caption

SOUTHWEST ELEVATION

Analysis: The southwest elevation will require the most shading in this design: this facade faces about 15 degrees west of direct south, so it receives a lot of direct sunlight which would cause discomfort in hotter summer months.

Horizontal shades about these southwest facing windows should be installed at 60 degrees. Vertical shades to the west should also be added at 75 degrees.

PORTFOLIO | JACKIE CONNARD

PSYCHROMETRIC CHART

IMAGE: Caption Caption

DESIGN STRATEGY #1 SUN SHADING OF WINDOWS

Windows are oriented to maximize passive heating for winter sun exposure but limiting the direct sunlilght on the hottest days of the year, especially on southern facades of the building.

DESIGN STRATEGY #2 GLAZING SELECTION ACCORDING TO ORIENTATION

Rather than utilizing the same glass on each facade, the building incorporates clear glazing on the south facade to maximize solar heat gain. Low-E, high performance double pane glass should be used on west, north and east facades.

DESIGN STRATEGY #3 INCORPORATE COURTYARDS

Provide sunny wind-protected outdoor spaces to extend living area in cool weather climates: This was an important element in the design of the arts and crafts museum in Boston. Providing an outdoor courtyard with natural light and vegetation that is protected from the wind greatly expands the useable space for much of the year without increasing demand on the building’s heating and cooling systems.

MATERIALS

STEEL:

The structural framework of the building will be comprised of steel. Steel is produced locally throughout the New England region, including in the greater Boston area, making it a locally sourced material.

INSULATED GLAZING:

Insulated glazing provides a great source of energy savings throughout the lifecycle of a building. By limiting heat transfer through the glass, the building’s operational costs are decreased. Great advancements have also been made in glass production with minimal waste and science-based improvements in production.

LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE FLOORS:

Concrete slab floors will be featured throughout this design. Floors will be a polished finish throughout, eliminating the need for replacement of flooring material throughout the life-cycle of the building, and guaranteeing ease of cleaning and maintenance.

COST ESTIMATE:

The cost of structural steel for standard size framing members is in the range of $1.00 to $1.55 per pound. With the given amount of wall space, I estimate the steel cost will be in the range of $1,200,000 including foundation re-inforcing.

COST ESTIMATE:

Glazing is used throughout this design, including an elaborate glass-enclosure for the spiral staircase, large sliding glass door panels, fixed glass windows, and glass railings at roof level. Glass costs, including structural glass will be around $2,200,000.

COST ESTIMATE:

The concrete flooring will be mid-grade concrete finish and should cost about $12/ sf. Cost of concrete floors for approximately 30,000sf of floor area is in the range of $360,000.

JACKIE

TALLY - MATERIAL ASSEMBLY ANALYSIS

Legend

(impacts +

The product here represents raw material extraction, processing, intermediate transportation and manufacturing/ assembly. In the case of this wood framing, the global warming potential is a remarkable - 84% due to the amount of sequestered carbon in the material.

The global warming potential of the wood floor structure studied is heavily influenced by the end of life cycle at 75%.

The impacts here are that the wood has a low degree of likelihood of being recycled or reused, and a high probability of being landfilled or incinerated.

Maintenance and replacement makes up 18% of the global warming potential. This encompasses the replacement of materials in accordance with their expected service life, which in this case is assumed to be the lifetime of the building.

Transportation and Module D are both low impact on the global warming potential for the wood structural members here at 2% and 6% respectively.

Legend

Life Cycle Stages Product [A1-A3] Transportation [A4] Maintenance and Replacement [B2-B5] End of Life [C2-C4] Module D [D]

Net value (impacts + credits)

Life Cycle Stages

Product [A1-A3] Transportation [A4]

Maintenance and Replacement [B2-B5] End of Life [C2-C4] Module D [D]

This life cycle stage analysis itemized by division allows us to examine the relative global warming potential of the various parts of the material assembly we have chosen: in this case laminated veneer lumber (LVL) framing the finishes which consist of vinyl flooring, underlayment and adhesive.

The global warming potential is again greatly reduced by the sequestered carbon in the LVL framing.

69% of the global warming potential comes from the end of life implications of the wood framing.

A significant percentage of the global warming potential also results from the maintenance and replacement of the finishes (17%) with a life cycle around 10 years.

Project Name

Full building summary

Results per Life Cycle Stage, itemized by Division

Legend

Net value (impacts + credits)

Product [A1-A3] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

Transportation [A4] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

Maintenance and Replacement [B2-B5] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

End of Life [C2-C4] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

Module D [D] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

The overall global warming potential of the concrete floor structure is similar to the wood floor structure: 22,638 kg CO2eq for the concrete compared with 20,204 kg CO2eq for the wood. This is largely because the concrete selected for this project was 3000 psi with 30% fly ash. Similar to wood, fly ash contains sequestered carbon which lowers the overall global warming potential of this material.

The maintenance and replacement contributes a more significan percentage of the total global warming potential: 44% compared with 18% for the wood floor structure.

The most remarkable difference is the product, with concrete contributing 45% of the global warming potential. If the fly ash were not included, this figure would be significantly higher.

(impacts + credits) Life Cycle Stages Product [A1-A3] Transportation [A4] Maintenance and Replacement [B2-B5] End of Life [C2-C4] Module D [D]

The results per life cycle stage itemized by division again offer more insight into the overall global warming potential of the selected materials.

The most significant contributor here is the maintenance and replacement of the finishes, which have a 10 year life cycle and contribute 44% of the GWP. Maintenance and replacement of the concrete is negligible.

The product: manufacturing, raw material extraction and processing of the concrete also contributes a large portion of the total, at 37%, with the product portion of the finishes contributing about 8%.

The end of life impact makes up about 10% of the total GWP, with the concrete contributing the majority of the impact here. Compared with the LVL framing, this is a significantly smaller percentage of GWP resulting from end of life, meaning the product is more likely to be recycled.

Project Name

Full building summary

Results

per Life Cycle Stage, itemized by Division

Legend

Net value (impacts + credits)

Product [A1-A3] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

Transportation [A4] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

Maintenance and Replacement [B2-B5] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes End of Life [C2-C4] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes Module D [D] 03 - Concrete 09 - Finishes

This product comparison highlights the six different types of concrete from various manufacturers geographically centered around Boston, MA.

The 78 results had a range of 149 - 475 kgCO2e embodied per cubic yard. Of the six products being compared, five are relatively similar ranging between 252 and 317 kgCO2e per cubic yard. The Saugus aggregate has a considerably lower value of 171 kgCO2e per cubic yard, so that material was selected for the building.

The above Sankey diagram illustrates how individual materials in each system contribute to the building as a whole.

If you look at each component, the bar is partially solid color and partially hatched. The solid portion represents the 20th percentile estimate and the hatched portion represents the conservative estimate.

When an EPD is selected, the solid line ----R---- indicates the particular product selected and allows you to visualize where your product falls relative to other available products.

This diagram gives a quite complete picture of how individual products contribute to a building’s embodied carbon.

JACKIE

This LEED bar chart is another way to view the environmental repercussions of material selections. The purple value of each material represents the baseline value for any material. The green bar represents the best possible product selection of the available products.

The yellow value represents the selected product. In the case of concrete, the realized product was below the LEED achievable value because it incorporated a high percentage of fly ash and therefore sequestered carbon.

The steel, insulation and gypsum board each had a value below the baseline but above the best LEED achievable selection. Overall the building had a 45% reduction in kgCO2e per square foot.

JACKIE

HOLISTIC SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainability strategies can affect and involve multiple COTE measures. As an example: think how many measures are influenced by carbon metrics? The chart below represents the interconnectivity of the COTE measures.

MEASURE 1: DESIGN FOR INTEGRATION

1 ‐ What is the big idea?

To create a place that fosters community engagement and strengthens the ties between two distinct neighborhoods.

COMMUNITY

Place based. ECOLOGY

Aquifer/watershed, shared resource.

Climate appropriate landscape. Rainwater harvesting. WATER

Financial resilience. Economic benefits of biophilic design. Low maintenance design.

District systems. Bioclimatic and passive design.

Water savings, water independence.

ECONOMY

Life cycle cost, Life cycle analysis.

Energy savings from transportation and treatment of water. ENERGY

Carbon emissions from transportation. Air quality. Connection to nature.Water quality.

Locally sourced materials. Environmentally conscious material extraction, mfg., transp. and disposal.

Social equity is a major component of resilience.

Climate change: fires, earthquakes, floods, ocean rise.

Aquifer conservation, surface water quality and enjoyment, watershed protection.

Water resilience. Flooding, precipitation changes, drought.

User groups, profiles, heat maps. Biodiversity.Mindful presence of water.

Operational costs and costs from productivity of building occupants.

Durability and maintenance of materials.

Daylighting as energy conversation measure.

WELLNESS

Embodied carbon of materials. Safer material selection, material transparency. RESOURCES

Right sizing, flexibility for growth and change.

Replicable, cost effective strategies.

Carbon's role in climate change. Passive survivability. Embodied carbon savings from adaptive reuse. CHANGE

Measurement and verification. Tracking health impacts.Future adaptability. Post‐occupancy evaluations. DISCOVERY

The site is currently occupied by a grade level parking lot so there are great possibilities for a positive ecological impact. The design prioritized providing quiet, public green space.

The courtyard garden, occupied green roof and livened streetscape are all elements of the design that incorproate native plantings. Native plantings will include mosses, grasses, flowers, flowering shrubs and trees. Plants will be selected to enhance the museum environment throughout the year, providing visual interest in winter, as well as spring, summer and autumn.

This will provide a habitat for birds and insects in the midst of the city of Boston.

January18,992

APPROACH TO WATER USE:

Water re-use on site will be the top priority of this site. Because the building covers a large portion of the surface area of the site, water collected and stored in on-site cisterns will not meet the demand of the building.

Therefore, potable water will be required to be used for some irrigation and indoor plumbing. The roof space will include raised garden beds to be maintained by kitchen support staff of the rooftop restaurant and bar, and will use rainwater.

Gray water will be recycled and reused for plumbing throughout the building. 100% of stormwater will be retained on-site, which will be an improvement from the current run-off conditions of the 90% impermeable asphalt parking lot.

The design of this museum and community center is focused on local artisans and makers, with an emphasis on tranquil green space. Because of this, the material palette for the design is extremely simple - light-weight poured and polished concrete floors, plaster walls over locally produced steel frame, and lots of glass.

This is part of an effort to minimize maintenance and material replacement. Most of the decorative design elements are produced in-house by the artisans in their studios, so these transportation costs are eliminated.

January10,000.0 3,000.0 8,000.0 3,000.0 February10,000.0 3,000.0 8,000.0 3,200.0 March10,000.0 3,000.0 8,600.0 3,200.0 April10,000.0 3,000.0 9,000.0 3,000.0 May10,000.0 3,000.0 10,000.0 3,400.0 June10,000.0 3,000.0 15,000.0 4,600.0 July10,000.0 3,000.0 18,000.0 5,000.0 August10,000.0 3,000.0 20,000.0 5,400.0 September10,000.0 3,000.0 18,000.0 4,800.0 October10,000.0 3,000.0 14,000.0 3,600.0 November10,000.0 3,000.0 9,000.0 3,200.0 December10,000.0 3,000.0 8,000.0 3,000.0

Part of the designing for energy strategy of this building is tied to the design for climate: utilizing natural daylighting, sun shading, and a large central courtyard as habitable space with minimal conditioning costs.

Another element in the design for energy is the consideration of building longevity and potential post-occupancy. Because the existing site is un-built, there is no opportunity to use existing infrastructure, but the open plan and simple concept of the design could be retrofitted in the future in a number of ways.

Building materials were specifically selected to reduce the environmental impact and global warming potential of the design.

Where concrete was used for floor structure and finished floor material, a high concentration of fly-ash was included because of the sequestered carbon.

Materials were also selected based on regional availability to minimize transportation impacts.

Additional selections were made based on products’ longevity. This was done to moderate both the environmental and financial cost of upkeep and maintenance.

SUMMARY

This design exceeded design standards on a number of the

measures as indicated in these results from the COTE Framework for

DESIGN FOR DISCOVERY

(PREVIOUS PAGE)

As a partially publicly funded building and a community resource, the experienced results of this design were very important to understand.

Post-occupancy analysis was conducted by a third party to understand the design impacts on both employees and visitors.

This data is shared with employees, visitors, and the design and oversight team. It is also published for other industry leaders and professionals to study.

This page compares metrics against their benchmark along a scale from "Baseline" to "Very High Performance"

Measure

Measure 3: Design For Ecology

Percent

Vegetated area increase 0% 100%

Percent of Site with Native Plantings 0% 100%

Percent of Vegetated Area with Native Plantings 0% 100%

Net energy reduction from Benchmark 0% 91% 89% 105%

Percent from renewable energy 0% 30% 31% 100%

Percent Operational Carbon Reduction from Benchmark0% 88% 73% 100%

Lighting Power Density % Reduction 0% 75%

Quality views 0% 100%

Operable windows 0% 100%

Daylit area (sDA 300/50%) 0% 100%

ASE Compliant Area (ASE 1000,250) 0% 100%

Is CO2 Measured? No (0) Yes (1)

Is VOC measured? No (0) Yes (1)

Materials with health certifications 0 10+

Chemicals of Concern Avoided 0 10+

Embodied carbon intensity (kg‐C02e / sf)

Total embodied carbon (kg‐C02e)

Embodied carbon modeled No (0) Yes (1)

Biogenic carbon considered? No (0) Yes (1)

Percent of reused floor area 0% 100%

Percent of construction waste diverted 0% 100%

Percent of recycled content of building materials 0% 100%

THE BIG IDEA:

To create a place that fosters community engagement and strengthens the ties between two distinct neighborhoods

CARBON OVER TIME:

CARBON OVER TIME:

Cumulative carbon after 1 year occupancy

Cumulative carbon after 1 year occupancy

CARBON OVER TIME:

Commute/year 15% Energy/year 14% Building Materials 71%

Commute/year 15% Energy/year 14% Building Materials 71%

Cumulative carbon over building life

Cumulative carbon over building life

Building Materials 1%

Building Materials 1%

Commute/year 51% Energy/year 48%

Commute/year 51% Energy/year 48%

Cumulative carbon over building life

Carbon Calculations

Carbon Calculations

Commute/year 15% Energy/year 14% Building Materials 71%

Total kg of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents from:

Total kg of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents from:

Building Materials 1%

Lifespan Commute/yearEnergy/yearBuilding Materials Total

Lifespan Commute/yearEnergy/yearBuilding Materials Total

Cumulative carbon after 1 year occupancy Commute/year 51% Energy/year 48%

1Year81,903 77,040 386,000 544,942 20Year1,638,0521,540,793386,000 3,564,845 100Year8,190,2597,703,967386,000 16,280,226 200Year16,380,51815,407,934386,000 32,174,453 Design 200Year16,380,51815,407,934386,000 32,174,453

1Year81,903 77,040 386,000 544,942 20Year1,638,0521,540,793386,000 3,564,845 100Year8,190,2597,703,967386,000 16,280,226 200Year16,380,51815,407,934386,000 32,174,453 Design 200Year16,380,51815,407,934386,000 32,174,453

Total Percentage of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents from:

Lifespan Commute/yearEnergy/yearBuilding Materials Total

Carbon Calculations

Lifespan Commute/yearEnergy/yearBuilding Materials Total

1Year15.0% 14.1% 70.8% 100.0% 20Year46.0% 43.2% 10.8% 100.0% 100Year50.3% 47.3% 2.4% 100.0% 200Year50.9% 47.9% 1.2% 100.0% Design 0Year50.9% 47.9% 1.2% 100.0%

1Year81,903 77,040 386,000 544,942 20Year1,638,0521,540,793386,000 3,564,845 100Year8,190,2597,703,967386,000 16,280,226 200Year16,380,51815,407,934386,000 32,174,453 Design 200Year16,380,51815,407,934386,000 32,174,453

1Year15.0% 14.1% 70.8% 100.0% 20Year46.0% 43.2% 10.8% 100.0% 100Year50.3% 47.3% 2.4% 100.0% 200Year50.9% 47.9% 1.2% 100.0% Design 0Year50.9% 47.9% 1.2% 100.0%

Total kg of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents from:

>

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. EPA Carbon Footprint Calculator. February 5, 2022. https://www3.epa.gov/ carbon-footprint-calculator/.

> 2. Global Footprint Network, Footprint Calculator. February 5, 2022. https://www. footprintcalculator.org/.

> 3. Mallison, Lloyd. Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum Horticulture 2 Courtyard. 2018. https://www.bostonmagazine.com/arts-entertainment/2018/08/06/ isabella-stewart-gardner-block-party/.

> 4. Boston Old State House. 2018. Accessed February 21, 2022. https://www.flickr. com/photos/mobili/49280448012/.

> 5. Wage Distribution. Data from the Census Bureau ACS PUMS 1-Year Estimate. February 21, 2022. https://datausa.io/profile/geo/boston-ma/.

> 6. Boston Walkability. February 21, 2022. https://www.walkscore.com/MA/Boston.

> 7. Emerald Necklace Map. February 21, 2022. https://www.emeraldnecklace.org/.

> 8. 2030 Palette. Indirect Gain: Sunspace. Stefan Behnisch. March 1, 2022. http://2030palette.org/

> 9. 2030 Palette. Direct Gain: Glazing. Chuck Choi. March 1, 2022. http://2030palette.org/

> 10. Tally. April 25, 2022. https://choosetally.com/.

> 11. “Environmental Consulting Group Inc.” EC3. May 6, 2022.