richardson memorial hall charrette presentation

F X F O W L ERMH SUSTAINABLE STRATEGIES CHARRETTE, 22-23 MARCH 2011

TULANERICHARDSON MEMORIAL HALL

SUSTAINABLE STRATEGIES CHARRETTE

22-23 MARCH 2011


INTRODUCTION

A Vision for the Future of Richardson Memorial Hall

SUSTAINABILITY CHARRETTE TULANE UNIVERSITY

RICHARDSON MEMORIAL HALL

March 22nd-23rd 2011Richardson Memorial Hall – Room 201

12:00-12:10

12:10-12:20

12:50-1:05

1:05-1:30

1:30-1:50

1:50-2:00

Day 1: March 22nd, 2011

Dean Schwartz/ FXFOWLE

Liz Davey/ Collette Creppell

FXFOWLE/ Andropogon Transsolar/SGH Altieri/FXFOWLE

FXFOWLE/ Tulane Facilities

Introduction

Tulane’s Environmental Initiatives

Site and Campus Relationships

Climate Analysis & Passive Design

Systems Operations and Metrics

12:35-12:50

12:20-12:35

el dorado/SGH

FXFOWLE / el dorado

Architecture

Occupancy/Survey

Q&A/Break 2:00-2:30 pm

Team Presentation 12:00-2:00 pm

2

1

Breakout Groups Part 1 2:30-3:45 pm3

4

6

5

7

Break 3:45-4:00 pm

Final Report Day 1 5:15-6:00 pm

Breakout Groups Part 2 4:00-5:15 pm

Dinner 7:00-9:30 pm

Day 2: March 23rd, 2011

8

10

9

11

12

Breakout groups Part 3 9:00-10:15 am

Breakout Groups Part 4 10:30-11:45 am

Break 10:15-10:30 am

Workgroup Final Summary 11:45am–12:00 pm

Optional Afternoon Sessions 2:30–5:00 pm

Final Reports, Conclusions and Next Steps 12:00-1:15 pm (Town Hall)

TGIW 5:00 pm

Lecture “Designing a Sustainable Future” Guy Geier, FXFOWLE


INTRODUCTION

Agenda: Day 1




12:00-12:10

12:10-12:20

12:50-1:05

1:05-1:30

1:30-1:50

1:50-2:00






Introduction





12:35-12:50

12:20-12:35

el dorado/SGH

FXFOWLE / el dorado

Architecture

Occupancy/Survey



2

1


4

6

5

7

Break 3:45-4:00 pm



Dinner 7:00-9:30 pm


8

10

9

11

12



Break 10:15-10:30 am




TGIW 5:00 pm



INTRODUCTION

Agenda: Day 2


INTRODUCTION

Agenda: Workgroups & Topics

TUES2:30-3:45

TUES4:00-5:15

WED9:00-10:15

WED10:30-11:45

Site and CampusRelationships

InteriorOrganizationand Function

Systems

Climate andEnvelope



Systems

Climate andEnvelope



Systems

Climate andEnvelope



Systems

Climate andEnvelope

1 2 3 4 5Dan Maginn Pete Pesce Steve Salzer Ilana Judah Guy Geier



Systems

Climate andEnvelope

group group group group group


Kenneth Schwartz, Dean

INTRODUCTION

PresentersTULANE

Collette Creppell, University ArchitectLiz Davey, Office of Environmental Affairs

F X F O W L EGuy Geier, FAIA, FIIDA, LEEDPeter Pesce, AIAIlana Judah, Int’l Assoc. AIA, LEED

Dan Maginn, AIASteve Salzer, AIA

Philip C. Steiner, P.E.AltieriSeborWieber LLC

TRANSSOLARErik Olsen, P.E.

Yaki Miodovnik, RLA, ASLA, CSLA

Sean O’Brien, P.E., LEED AP


campus environmental initiatives

Buildings64.3%

Travel25.5%

Commute7.4%

Waste0.6%

Study Abroad1.3%

Fleet0.9%

2009 Emissions by Sector

Analyzing Tulane’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions


CAMPUS ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES

Climate Action Plan & Campus Goals




21,082 20,243 17,537 23,956

77,620 63,765 64,232

68,568

52,796

59,951 62,579

59,510

‐

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

2006 2007 2008 2009

Emissions by Scope

Total Scope 3

Total Scope 2

Total Scope 1

Tulane GHG Emissions (MTC02e)




Normalized Emissions

2006 2007 2008 2009ACUPCC Average

Full Time Enrollment (FTE) 9,704 9,642 10,091 10,695 Per Capita Emissions (MTCO2e/FTE) 15.61 14.93 14.31 14.21 7.96

Total Building Area (sq. feet) 6,713,508 6,746,734 7,038,007 7,156,328 Emissions Per 1000 sq. Feet(MTCO2e/1000 sq. Feet) 22.57 21.34 20.51 21.23 19.94

Emissions per student and sq. foot




0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

External Actions

Measures during 2015‐2020

Measures during 2010‐2015

Measures Underway

Total emissions

Emission Reduction “Wedges”

A Recycling Snapshot:Uptown Campus RecycleMania Results• In February 2011. . .

Garbage: 52‐57 tons/ weekRecycling: 6‐10 tons/weekRecycling Diversion Rate: 10‐18%

• Tulanians can recycle all paper, cardboard, plastic bottles, aluminum & metal cans on the uptown campus.

• Recycling services also provided for office electronics, laser and ink jet cartridges, and residence hall move‐out (clothes, household items, food, books, Mardi Gras beads).



Recycling



Green Building Initiatives & Projects1990’s Pre-Katrina Post-Katrina 2011 -

C t I iti ti

Timeline

Early Initiatives a a Current Initiatives

o Israel Building

o Alcee Fortier

o Willow Residences

o Wall Residential College

o Lavin Bernick Center for

University Life

Recycling Program

oMcAlister Place

LEED Standards

o Hertz Family Practice Facility

o J. Bennett Johnson Labs

o Broad Street Health Clinicy

- Building Commissioning

- Energy Modeling

- Revit

Energy Retrofits/ Conservation

o Richardson Memorial

Sustainable Strategies

gy

o Dinwiddie Hall

o Residential College II

*

BLDG PHOTO1

BLDG PHOTO2

BLDG PHOTO3

BLDG PHOTO4

BLDG PHOTO5

BLDG PHOTO6

BLDG PHOTO7

BLDG PHOTO8

BLDG PHOTO9

BLDG PHOTO10

BLDG PHOTO11

• Member of U.S. Green Building Council – since 2007

• Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) – since 2008

• American College & University President’s Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) – since 2008

* TSA Prototype House #4 – LEED Silver with two more houses completed or in progress



Green Building Initiatives & Projects

Dinwiddie HallCollege II

ResidentialCollege II

Hertz Family Practice Facility

Features: Features: Features:Features:

o re-using existing building

o recycling building materials

o maximizing daylight and

Features:

o lighting and HVAC controls

by motion sensor

o maximized daylighting and

i

Features:

o low flow showers and low flush

plumbing fixtures

o Solar ready

daylight harvesting

o 76% solid waste recycled

Energy Usage:

o estimated to use 17.9% less

views

o louvered sun shades

Energy Usage:

o energy usage of the

Energy Usage:

o energy usage in the design is

energy for 14.3% savings which

translates to $14,468/year

mechanical systems is

estimated to use 21% less

energy than baseline design

T ki LEED Sil /G ld

estimated to use 36% less

energy than baseline design

T ki LEED Hi h G ld/Pl tiTracking LEED High Silver/Gold Tracking LEED Silver/Gold Tracking LEED High Gold/Platinum



Green Building Initiatives & ProjectsSUSTAINABLE TULANE,

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY

SUSTAINABILITY BENEFITSTHE COST OF LEED

URBANbuild

GREENbuild

City Center

SAVING MONEY (Financial)

FIRST COST VS. LIFECYCLE SAVINGSCost Recovery Time: For university it might be 5-15 years

2% - 3% Silver/Gold 4% - 6% Platinum

Center for Public Service: Samuel Green edible school yardGreen Light NOLA

Priestly Charter School for Construction

For university it might be 5 15 years For businesses it might be 3-5 years

COMMISSIONING & ENERGY MODELING (most payback) Cost Recovered by :

Center for Bio-Environmental Research

Campus Sustainability Report Card A- (2010)

Lower risk Higher energy efficiency Knowing the building and operationsbefore it is opens

SAVING THE PLANET (E i t l) SAVING THE PLANET (Environmental)

Lower energy use Lower water use Less site disturbance

HEALTHY BUILDING/ HEALTHY PEOPLE

Improved health Higher productivity Reduced absenteeism Lower healthcare costs Lower healthcare costs General wellbeing


occupancy & program

RESPONDENTS

135 students

28 faculty

4 admin/ other

= distribution of years at RMH

SPACE USAGE

83% studio as primary work space

45% classroom as secondary work space

20% other secondary space (dorm, computer lab, etc)

16.5% library as secondary work space

WEEKLY HOURS

52.5% 11-30 hours in primary work space

41% > 30 hours in primary work space

60% 10 hours or less in secondary space

46% > 40 hours in RMH

63% most time spent during day


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey GENERAL BUILDING / PRIMARY WORKSPACE SATISFACTION

41-42% satisfied 26% neutral 32-33% dissatisfied

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

72% conditions interfere with their work

BEST FEATURES

Daylight

ADEQUATE FEATURES

Acoustics Audio Visual

INADEQUATE FEATURES

Information Technology Indoor Air Quality Artificial Lighting Information Technology Storage VERY INADEQUATE FEATURES

Thermal Comfort


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey BEST COMMON SPACES

Studios Library

ADEQUATE COMMON SPACES

Outdoor spaces Shop Digital output shop Classrooms

INADEQUATE COMMON SPACES

Computer Labs Pin up / Jury Drawing Board Cafe

TOP FAVORITE SPACES

Lobby Library

Studios Entry porch/ outdoors

TOP LEAST FAVORITE SPACES

Computer Lab Offices/ Ground Floor Drawing Board Cafe Classrooms 204 & 404


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey STUDIOS - SPACE 68% More space for group work

64% More space for storage 73% More comfortable furniture

STUDIOS - THERMAL COMFORT 66% Dissatisfied

Comments- Too cold in cold weather Mixed issues in hot weather Problematic at all times of day Humidity problem in hot weather Need for personal control Many windows are not operable

STUDIOS - LIGHT 78% Satisfied with natural light

35% Dissatisfied with artificial light 62.5% No task lights

Comments- Need for lighting controls Blinds/ shades for glare Poor quality artificial light


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey STUDIOS - ACOUSTICS Mixed Satisfaction

Comments- Loud window AC units Hard reflective surfaces Loyola Physical plant noise Group / professor meetings Lack of separations Student culture

STUDIOS - USE 50% 11-20 hours on weekdays outside class 45% 11-20 hours on weekends outside class

Would use more if.... Improved thermal comfort More comfortable furniture Computers integrated in studios Lounge/ rest/ sleeping areas Food preparation/ kitchen space Acoustic control

Proximity/ transportation to residence ALTERNATIVES TO STUDIO USE 35% Library

44% Computer lab


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey OFFICES - USE 80% use as primary work space 11-30 hours OFFICES - SATISFACTION 65% Satisfied with amount of daylight 60% Dissatisfied with amount of space

60% Dissatisfied with comfort of furniture

62% Dissatisfied with air quality

69-72% Dissatisfied with temperature

Comments- Humidity - problem for books

Mold Variations in temperature

Air infiltration through windows Lack of controls/ blinds No natural ventilation/ operable windows Shop needs to be acoustically insulated Noise from corridor due to air return Visual privacy from exterior


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey CLASSROOMS - FAVORITES

201, 202, 204 301, 305 405

CLASSROOMS - LEAST FAVORITE 201, 204 (temperature issues) 404, 405, 407/409 404 worst overall Furniture rated poorly in many rooms

Comments- Shades/ shutters insufficient for glare Furniture comfort/ lack writing space Poor Acoustics/ AV (internal/external) Poor thermal comfort/ controls Poor artificial lights/ controls Noise from Loyola Need business school style classrooms

PIN-UP/ JURY SPACES

36-57% Dissatisfied with quality, quantity, visibility and access

Comments- Poor lighting Too public/ lacks intimacy/ acoustic issues

Need to incorporate use of technology


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey LIBRARY

66% use 1-5 hours per week 66-75% temperature comfortable

Would use more if.... Open longer/ at night More computers/ software/ outlets More up to date resources Better seating/ furniture

COMPUTER LAB

Mixed Importance 75% dissatisfied with air quality 68% dissatisfied with space available 68% dissatisfied with lack of daylight 50% dissatisfied with number of computers Issues of heat, odor, cleanliness More distribution throughout RMH

DIGITAL OUTPUT LAB

79% rate as useful 51% use 1-2 per week

Needs better management


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey SHOP

90% use between once per month and never

Issues of lack of space and air quality Needs longer/ weekend hours Acoustic control to adjacent spaces

DRAWING BOARD CAFE

44% use 1-2 per week Would use more if.... Open longer/ at night More ambiance/ daylight Better quality food Better air quality/ odors Access to exterior space

OUTDOOR SPACES Mixed Importance Not enough opportunity to go outdoors

Ideas... Outdoor sheltered classroom Outdoor pinup/ sketching areas Covered space for full scale experiments Bike Lockers Tables & chairs to replace platforms

SECURITY

Most Feel their person and property is secure


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Occupant IEQ and Program Survey IMPORTANT ITEMS AND DREAMS FOR THE FUTURE...

“The building could be a place for the city. It can signify the new outlook of the city. A role model for the city. It can create interaction between the different studios.”

Better recycling!

“Combining a high tech approach to environmental systems with enhancing the historic elements of the building structure.”

Technologically advanced lighting and controls system

High quality Computer Lab

Lounge/ Nap Areas

“Passive ventilation in the spring and fall. Zones for controlling a Living Building.”

Strong connection between inside and outside

Outdoor Classrooms/ Seating

Building as teaching tool

Modern and innovative within Historic Facade


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Program

MAJOR PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES

STUDIOS IMPROVE STUDIO EXPERIENCE / STUDIO CULTURE CREATE RANGE OF PIN-UP SPACES, BOTH FLEXIBLE AND FIXED EXPLORE COMPUTER LABS WITHIN STUDIOS EXPLORE DIGITAL IMAGING ON MULTIPLE FLOORS

CLASSROOMS ESTABLISH INTERMEDIATE-SIZED CLASSROOM(S)

OFFICES IMPROVE ADMIN OFFICE LAYOUT IMPROVE BUILDING RECEPTION SEQUENCE IMPROVE FACULTY OFFICING AREAS EXPAND / IMPROVE TRUDC / CITY CENTER / URBANBUILD OFFICES

45%

18%

15%


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Program

RESEARCH / LIBRARY FUNCTIONS EMBRACE CURRENT / PREDICTED TRENDS IN LIBRARY ENVIRONMENTS CONSIDER RELATIONSHIP TO CAFE ESTABLISH A CURATED ARCHITECTURE GALLERY EXTEND HOURS OF OPERATION

SHOP EXPAND AND IMPROVE SHOP TO INCLUDE CAPABILITIES BEYOND WOOD

PINUP EXPLORE DEDICATED AREAS FOR SMALL / MEDIUM / LARGE CRITS

10%

3%

3%



OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Program


DRAWING BOARD CAFE IMPROVE CAFE EXPERIENCE EXPLORE POTENTIAL OF CAFE AS PART OF LEARNING COMMONS

COMPUTER LAB EXPLORE DE-CENTRALIZED COMPUTER LAB LOCATIONS

DIGITAL OUTPUT LAB EXPLORE SEPARATING DIGITAL IMAGING FROM 3D FAB EXPLORE DIGITAL IMAGING ON MULTIPLE LEVELS

RESTROOMS INCREASE NUMBER OF FIXTURES IN BUILDING PER CODE

EXTERIOR AREAS EXPLORE SUSTAINABLE LANDSCAPE FEATURES IMPROVE EXTERIOR AMENITIES (SEATING, BIKE PARKING, ETC)

2%

2%

1%

1%


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Building Schedule

EXT. STAIR EXT. STAIR

EXT. STAIR

MEN WOMEN

STORAGE

CLASSROOM

OFFICE

CLASSROOM301

303B 303 303A305

304A

304

308 310306

302

R3001M

3STW

3

3STW2

R3002W

3STW

4

3PS2 LOBBY

LOBBY3PS1

OFFICE OFFICE

OFFICE

OFFICEOFFICEOFFICECLASSROOM

DN DNUP

UP

(316)

ELEV

3STW1

N

SPRING SEMESTERTYPICAL MONDAY7 AM TO 1 PM

5 - 25 OCCUPANT HOURS




100 + OCCUPANT HOURS

LEVEL THREE FLOOR PLAN


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Building Schedule



EXT. STAIR

MEN WOMEN

STORAGE

CLASSROOM

OFFICE

CLASSROOM301

303B 303 303A305

304A

304

308 310306

302

R3001M

3STW

3

3STW2

R3002W

3STW

4

3PS2 LOBBY

LOBBY3PS1

OFFICE OFFICE

OFFICE


DN DNUP

UP

(316)

ELEV

3STW1

SPRING SEMESTERTYPICAL MONDAY1 PM TO 7 PM







OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Building Schedule

SPRING SEMESTERTYPICAL MONDAY7 PM TO 1 AM








EXT. STAIR

MEN WOMEN

STORAGE

CLASSROOM

OFFICE

CLASSROOM301

303B 303 303A305

304A

304

308 310306

302

R3001M

3STW

3

3STW2

R3002W

3STW

4

3PS2 LOBBY

LOBBY3PS1

OFFICE OFFICE

OFFICE


DN DNUP

UP

(316)

ELEV

3STW1


OCCUPANCY & PROGRAM

Building Schedule

SPRING SEMESTERTYPICAL MONDAY1 AM TO 7 AM








EXT. STAIR

MEN WOMEN

STORAGE

CLASSROOM

OFFICE

CLASSROOM301

303B 303 303A305

304A

304

308 310306

302

R3001M

3STW

3

3STW2

R3002W

3STW

4

3PS2 LOBBY

LOBBY3PS1

OFFICE OFFICE

OFFICE


DN DNUP

UP

(316)

ELEV

3STW1


architecture


ARCHITECTURE

A History of Richardson Memorial Hall

ARCHITECTURE



Existing ConditionsExisting Conditions

• Solid masonry / load bearing walls• Single glazed / wood windows withminimal shading• Wood/steel framed roof; slate &terracotta

Construction style is more typical ofnorthern climates than warm/humidlocations with high solar gains


ARCHITECTURE

Structure, Materials, and Building Re-Use

Existing Conditions

Windows• Some deterioration – restorationlikely possible• Poor thermal performance• High solar heat gain

Walls• Extremely durable construction• Poor thermal performance• Some exterior restoration needed

Roofs• Durable wearing materials• Staining potential due to shading patterns• Localized repairs/restoration may be required


ARCHITECTURE

Structure, Materials, and Building Re-Use


ARCHITECTURE

Building Codes

PRELIMINARY CODE ANALYSIS

CODE: IBC 2006 (2009 PENDING); NFPA 101 WILL APPLY (MORE STRINGENT)

EGRESS: TWO MEANS OF EGRESS REQUIRED. EGRESS STAIRS TO BE ENCLOSED (OR CODE COMPLIANT EXTERIOR)

ATRIUMS: ATRIUM SPACES LIMITED TO TWO CONNECTED STORIES, THEREFOREA FIRE BARRIER MUST BE ESTABLISHED AT THE THIRD LEVEL FLOOR AND AT THE FIFTH LEVEL FLOOR.

EXISTING STAIRS: CAN REMAIN AS NON-REQUIRED "CONVENIENCE STAIRS"

EXIT CORRIDORS: BECAUSE BUILDING IS SPRINKLERED, THEY CAN BE NON RATED

ADA: BUILDING MUST BE MADE FULLY COMPLIANT

RESTROOMS: THERE WILL BE A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN TOILET FIXTURES, INCLUDING ADA.

E X T . S T A IR E X T . S T A IR

E X T . S T A IR

M E N W O M E N

S T O R A G E

C L A S S R O O M

O F F IC E

C L A S S R O O M301

303B 303 303A305

304A

304

308 310306

302

R 3001M

3ST

W3

3S T W 2

R 3002W

3ST

W4

3P S 2 L O B B Y

L O B B Y3P S 1

O F F IC E O F F IC E

O F F IC E

O F F IC EO F F IC EO F F IC EC L A S S R O O M

D ND N

U P

U P

(316 )

E L E V

3S T W 1

L E V E L T H R E E F L O O R P L A N N

N O N -R E Q U IR E D C O N V E N IE N C E S T A IR

XMIN . = X / 3

E G R E S S Z O N E E G R E S S Z O N E

XMIN . = X / 3

O P E N A T R IU M IS S U E


ARCHITECTURE

Egress

U P


E X T . S T A IR

M E C H .

C O R R ID O RC L A S S R O O M

O F F IC E

M 4001

404

403 405 411

402

4S T W 1

4E L E V 1

4S T W 2

4P S 1 L O B B Y

4C R D 1

C L A S S R O O M

C L A S S R O O M O F F IC E

D N D N

E L E V

C L A S S R O O M401

407?C L A S S R O O M ?

S T A IR

S T A IR

L E V E L F O U R F L O O R P L A N N

XMIN . = X / 3

E G R E S S Z O N E

XMIN . = X / 3

E G R E S S Z O N E

N O N -R E Q U IR E D C O N V E N IE N C E S T A IR T O 3

E N C L O S E D S T A IR T O 5C O D E C O M P L IA N T R IS E /R U NS E P A R A T IO N F R O M E L E V A T O R

E L IM IN A T E S T A IR T O 5


ARCHITECTURE

Egress

S T U D IO

CO

RR

IDO

R

D E S IG N L A B D E S IG N L A B(o p e n to flo o r b e lo w) ( o p e n to flo o r b e lo w)502

501

503

5P S 1 L O B B Y

5CR

D1

E L E V

C H A S E ?

C H A S E ?

C H A S E ?

C H A S E ?

L E V E L F IV E F L O O R P L A N N

E X T . S T A IR

D N

E G R E S S Z O N E B E L O W

T O E G R E S SB E L O W

E N C L O S E D S T A IR T O 4C O D E C O M P L IA N T R IS E /R U NS E P A R A T IO N F R O M E L E V A T O R

E L IM IN A T E S T A IR


ARCHITECTURE

Egress


E X T . S T A IR

CLO

SE

T

V E S T IB U L E

M E C H .

C L A S S R O O M

S L ID E

L IB R A R Y

S L ID EL IB R A R Y

201B

201A 2CLS

1 2CLS

2

M 2001

204

206

206A

202

S T A IR

K IT C H E N

C L O S E T

2P S 1L O B B Y

L O B B Y2P S 2

U P

L IB R A R Y

E L E V

L E C T U R E201

U P

D N D N

D N

L E V E L T W O F L O O R P L A N N

XMIN . = X / 3 MIN .= X / 3

E G R E S S Z O N E E G R E S S Z O N E

D ND N X


N O N -C O M P L IA N T G U A R D R A IL IS S U E


ARCHITECTURE

Egress

S H O P

O F F IC E

O F F IC E

C O R R ID O R

L O B B Y

S T O R A G E

C O R R ID O R

D IG IT A LO U T P U T L A B

M E C H .

D R A W IN G B O A R D C A F E

M E C H .

O F F IC EP R IN T S H O P

C L A S S R O O M

O F F IC E

110A

110

121119 117 115 113 111 109 107 105

M 1001

1CLS

1

1C L S 2

104

101

101A

J100

2

103

M 1002

123 125

116A

129127 131

116B 118 120

131A

122P 1002

1C R D 1

102

S T A IR

1P S 1

1C R D 2

1P S 2E L . L O B B Y

O F F IC EO F F IC EO F F IC E

O F F IC E O F F IC E O F F IC E O F F IC E O F F IC E

F A C U L T Y O P E R A T IO N S

O F F IC E O F F IC E O F F IC E

O F F IC E O F F IC E

S T O R A G E

O F F IC E

M E C H .

J1001JA N IT O R

R 1001WW O M E N

R 1002MM E NM 1003

M E C H A N IC A L

E 1001E L E C T .

M 1004M E C H .

1H W 1H A L L

E L E V .

K IT C H E N

C H A S EO F F IC E

114A 114BO F F IC E

U P U P

U P

E L E V .M E C H .

L E V E L O N E F L O O R P L A N N

E X T .S T A IR

E X T .S T A IR

E X T . S T A IR

P O T E N T IA L E G R E S S L O C A T IO N

E G R E S S Z O N E A B O V E E G R E S S Z O N E A B O V E





ARCHITECTURE

Egress


site & campus relationships


SITE & CAMPUS RELATIONSHIPS

Access and Transportation

ServiceParking

Service Route

Streets Shuttle/ Streetcar

Streets

105 spaces

101 spaces58 spaces

Shuttle Drop Off Location

Shuttle Route Bus Stop

Streetcar Stop



Access and Transportation

Students Faculty Staff

Personal VehicleCarpoolStreetcarBusWalking and BikingRespondents

2010 Commuting Survey Uptown Results

34.10%2.60%

0%1.90%

61.50%61

50.80%4.80%2.10%0.50%

32.80%39

74.80%6%

1.10%0.80%

13.70%111

Bike Path

Bike Path

Pedestrian Circulation

Campus Commuting

Major Path

Minor path


0 15 30 60 120 ft.30

property line

Richardson Memorial Hall DinwiddieHall

RichardsonBuilding

Gibson Quad

E N G I N E E R I N G R O A D

L O Y O L A U N I V E R S I T YWest Road

Parking Garage

Stallings Hall

GibsonHall

n


Site Plan



Exterior Opportunities

b c

a

e

d

f

n



Storms and Climate ChangeFEMA Advisory Base Flood Elevation (2006) 3 feet above Highest Existing Adjacent Grade

Existing ground floor is below HEAG+3’

Land sinking + sea level rise in Gulf of Mexico resulted in “relative sea-level rise” of three feet over past 100 years

POTENTIAL STRATEGIES Protection Site grading Improved ventilation Dehumidification (high energy demand) Infrastructure improvements

Resistance Mold resistant Materials Natural - Select woods, ceramic tile, porcelain, rubber Engineered - Fiberglass covered drywall, insulation, paints, coatings

Passive collection/ containment

ABFE3 ft above HEAG



Natural Systems: Eco-RegionSouthern Holocene Meander Belts

Drains all or parts of 31 States, 2 Canadian Provences (over 1,000,000 square •

miles) into the Gulf of Mexico.Critical wildlife habitat includies the largest continuous system of wetlands in •

North America.Levees have separated much of the Mississippi from its natural hydrologic •

system contributing to a decrease of sediment mobilization and altering the natural delta formation leading to habitat loss.Point bars, depositional features along the inside of stream beds, were •

originally occupied by diverse forests of cottonwood, sugarberry, sycamore, green ash, and pecan. Drier sides of the flood plain are marked by willow oak, water oak, swamp chestnut oak, and cherrybark oak. Also common in the southern region are live oak, Spanish moss, and laurel oak.

Eco-Region Map

Bottomland Deciduous Forest Vegetation

Tulane University



Natural Sytems: Geology and Physiography

0 2,000Feet

elevation

-28 - -25

-24 - -20

-19 - -15

-14 - -10

-9 - -5

-4 - 0

0 - 5

5 - 10

10 - 15

15 - 20

20 - 25

25 - 30

30 - 35

35 - 40

40 - 45

Mississippi River

Point Bar Alluvial Deposits

Levee Flank Depression

Metairie-Gentilly Ridge

Richardson Hall

Physiography Map Geology Sections

Holocene Geology and Physiography of New Orleans

Mississippi River levees form the high ground derived from alluvial •

deposits underlain by sands. Typically gray and brown silts, silty clay, and some very fine sands.The Mid-town area between the Mississippi and Metairie Ridge was an •

enclosed depression known as a “levee flank depression” The campus is situated on the border between the alluvial deposits and the depression.The site is underlain by the Pleistocene age Prairie formation. This unit •

dips down beneath the city and is generally encountered at depths greater than 40 feet.



Natural Systems: HydrologyTo Lake Pontchartrain

17th

Str

eet C

anal

elevation (msl)-28 - -20

-19 - -10

-9 - 0

0 - 10

10 - 20

20 - 30

30 - 40

40 - 50

0 2,500Feet

0 2,800Feet

flood zone

500-yearflood zone

100-yearflood zone

100-year

500-year

HydrologyCampus drains away from the •

Mississippi River, eventually towards the 17th Canal and into Lake PonchartrainCombined Sewer System •

modifies the natural hydrologic pattern, draining eastward towards Mississippi River Gulf OutletTulane University was on the •

border of the Katrina flood extents due to its elevated location on the natural levee. Flooding was minimal north of Freret Street including the historic quad.

Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans http://swbnola.org

The Sewage Collection

System

The Sewage Collection

SystemMissis-sippi River Gulf Outlet

Natural Hydrology Pattern Modified Hydrologic Pattern- Wastewater Katrina Flood Map

Flood Zone Map



Natural Systems: Water Resource

0

2

4

6

8

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Average Monthly Precipitation (in)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Potential Rooftop Rainwater Collection Volume (cu. ft.) 0 50’

Roof Collection11,600 sq. ft.

RoofGarden

RoofGarden

Roof Garden

RoofGarden

StorageCisterns

Water ReuseRichardson Hall could collect an average of 4000-6000 cu. •

ft. of rainwater per month.Irrigates approximately 0.5 acres, assuming 1” per week.•

Would require a theoretical cistern 14’ diamter and 40’ tall. •

for storage. (7000 cu. ft)Irrigation for the entire Quad would require 10x this amount•

Rainfall Pattern (average inches per month)

Rooftop Collection with surrounding Roof Gardens

Rooftop Collection Volume (average cu. ft. per month)

Quad Area for Irrigation



Natural Systems: Soils Sk

Cm

Ub

Sk

Ha

CmCS

Co

LV

CS

0 2,000Feet

NRCS Soil Types

Cm, Cancienne silt loam

Co, Cancienne silty clay loam

Ha, Harahan clay

Sk, Schriever clay

Ub, Urban land

W, Water

CS, Cancienne and Schriever soils,frequently flooded

LV, Levees-Borrow pits complex,0 to 25 percent slopes

Soil ConditionsCm, Cancienne silt loam (south campus) and,

Highly productive, found on natural levees. Consists of silty alluvium, depth to root •

restrictive layer > 60 in.Somewhat poorly drained, moderately high movement in restrictive layer. Low •

shrink-swell potential. (subsidence)High water table at 1.4 to 4 feet below the surface. Construction limitations are •

moderateSouthern hardwoods such as green ash, cottonwood, oaks, and sweetgum.•

Sk, Schriever clay (north campus)Found in backswamps. Consists of clayey alluvium, depth to root restrictive layer > •

60 in.Poorly drained hydric soil. Low water movement in the most restrictive layer. Very •

high shrink-swell potential. Severe construction limitations. (subsidence)High water table at 12 inches. Surface layer is very dark gray clay to 10 inches. •

Subsoils are dark gray clay. Fairly productive soil suitable for bermudagrass, dallisgrass, tall fescue and white •

clover. Good for tree species adapted to wet clay soils.

Soils Map

Subsidence Map Compaction



Site Conditions: Existing

Richardson Memorial Building

View West (w) View East (e)

View South (s)

Key Plan

View North (n)

e

n

s

w



Site Conditions: Spatial Quality and Characteristics

Pedestrian Connection

University Boundary

Gathering Spaces Material Use Gateway Active Open Space

Building Entrances/ Forecourt

Quad/ Green

Social Gathering Spaces

GoalsOrganization/ Hierarchy of Spaces•

Organization/ Hierarchy of path systems•

Gateways for Wayfinding•

Forecourts to celebrate entrances•

Outdoor gathering spaces•

Identify property and preserve campus •

identity



Site Conditions: Tree Cover

Shade Tree

Understory Tree

Gibson Quad Tree Cover Plan Richardson Building Tree Cover

Cherry

Magnolia

CypressLive oak

Bamboo

Cypress



Site Conditions: Hardscape Materials

Limestone

Concrete Stepping StonesConcrete Walk

Material RecycleRichardson Building Hardscape



Site Conditions: Infrastructure

Water

Sewer

Telecommunications

Down Spout

Sump Pump



Site Conditions: Site Furnishings

Light Fixture Bike Racks

Benches

Bike Rack/ Tables Table/ Trash Receptacle


climate analysis & passive design

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNThermal Comfort Factors

Comfort: Naturally ventilated spaces

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNThermal Comfort: Indoor Operative and Outdoor Air Temperatures

Ne

w O

rle

an

s

Mean Monthly Outdoor Air Temperature °C

Mean Monthly Outdoor Air Temperature °F

Indo

or O

pera

tive

Tem

pera

ture

°F

Indo

or O

pera

tive

Tem

pera

ture

°C

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

01 Jan 0:00 31 Jan 10:00 02 Mar 20:00 02 Apr 6:00 02 May 16:00 02 Jun 2:00 02 Jul 12:00 01 Aug 22:00 01 Sep 8:00 01 Oct 18:00 01 Nov 4:00 01 Dec 14:00 01 Jan 0:00

Am

bsol

ute

Hum

idity

[g/k

g]

Out

side

Air

Tem

pera

ture

[°F]

Outside Air Temperature [°F]

Absolute Humidity [g/kg]

Natural Ventilation

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNOutside Air Temperature and Absolute Humidity

Natural Ventilation

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNOutside Air Temperature and Absolute Humidity: Typical Winter Week

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

17 D

ec 0

:00

17 D

ec 1

2:00

18 D

ec 0

:00

18 D

ec 1

2:00

19 D

ec 0

:00

19 D

ec 1

2:00

20 D

ec 0

:00

20 D

ec 1

2:00

21 D

ec 0

:00

21 D

ec 1

2:00

22 D

ec 0

:00

22 D

ec 1

2:00

23 D

ec 0

:00

Outs

ide

Air T

empe

ratu

re [°

F]

Outside Air Temperature [°F]Absolute Humidity [‰]

Cold day

Mildday

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

14 O

ct 0

:00

14 O

ct 1

2:00

15 O

ct 0

:00

15 O

ct 1

2:00

16 O

ct 0

:00

16 O

ct 1

2:00

17 O

ct 0

:00

17 O

ct 1

2:00

18 O

ct 0

:00

18 O

ct 1

2:00

19 O

ct 0

:00

19 O

ct 1

2:00

20 O

ct 0

:00

Outs

ide

Air T

empe

ratu

re [°

F]

Outside Air Temperature [°F]

Absolute Humidity [‰]

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNOutside Air Temperature and Absolute Humidity: Typical Autumn Week

Mild day

Mildday

Comfort: Mechanically ventilated spaces

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNThermal Comfort Ranges

24H/D

Operation Time 8h - 20h80%

100%

0

5

10

15

20

25

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

Hum

idity

Rat

io [

‰]

Outdoor Air Temperature [°F]

ASHRAE winterindoor comfort range

ASHRAE summerindoor comfort range

Extended indoorcomfort range

20%

40%

60%

95 100

0

100

200

300

400

500

24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88

Natural Ventilation: 44% of occupied hours

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNOutside Air Temperature Statistics for Humidity Ratios <10 g/kg

Occupied hours: 8am – midnight

0

100

200

300

400

500

24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNOutside Air Temperature Statistics for Humidity Ratios <14 g/kg

Natural Ventilation: 63% of occupied hours

Occupied hours: 8am – midnight

316 27

208

341

381

523

51

499

461440

366

286

203

157

7

99

5636

20 20 180

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cum

ulat

ive

Freq

uenc

y [%

]

Freq

uenc

y [h

]

Wind Speed [mph]

X-Value Is Upper Limit

Interval: 8h - 20 h

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNWind Speed Statistics

0 h

100 h

200 h

300 h

400 h

500 h

600 h

700 h

800 h

900 h

1000 h0

23

45

68

90

113

135

158

180

203

225

248

270

293

315

338

0 h

100 h

200 h

300 h

400 h

500 h

600 h

700 h

800 h

900 h

1000 h0

23

45

68

90

113

135

158

180

203

225

248

270

293

315

338

>1.1 mph

>7.8 mph

>14.5 mph

>21.3 mph

>28.0 mph

All 24 hours a day+ Outside Air Temp < 77°F

8am – 8pm+ Outside Air Temp < 77°F

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNWind Speed, Direction and Frequency Statistics

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNNatural Ventilation Responses

Prevailing wind South

Natural ventilation with stack-driven exhaust through louvers

Natural ventilation with stack-driven exhaust through monitors

Natural ventilation with central mechanical exhaust

0 0 0 0 0

3846

5866

78 7986 81

5950

41 34

45

51

71

97

100 101 9089

88

85

4949

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Inso

latio

n [k

Wh/

m²]

total 1629 kWh/m²/a

Beam Radiation 913 kWh/m²/a

Diffuse Radiation 716 kWh/m²/a

Ground Reflection 0 kWh/m²/a

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNHorizontal Radiation

8 10 1316 18 18 18 17 15 13

9 8

2024

30

3338 37 40 38

3027

2218

25

28

30

41

38

3030 33

3640

28

25

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Inso

latio

n [k

Wh/

m²]

total 900 kWh/m²/a

Beam Radiation 381 kWh/m²/a

Diffuse Radiation 356 kWh/m²/a

Ground Reflection 163 kWh/m²/a

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNRadiation on Western Facade

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNSolar Control: View from the Sun (Mar 21)

6:45


7:30


8:15


9:00


9:45


10:30


11:15


12:00


12:45


13:30


14:15


15:00


15:45


16:30


17:15

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNSolar Control Responses

Exterior Shades Buffer zone

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNSolar Control Responses

Storm window with exterior shades Bottom-up interior shade

New window withsolar control coating

Exterior shades

Existing window usedas storm window

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNSolar Control Response

No solar control With solar control coating

Humidity Ratio <15 g/kg

Humidity Ratio 15 g/kg≥

2140 2140 20371690

1115680

29432

18391214

843

521

221

9921

00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96

2140 2140 20291661

1080629

253 22

1796

1154793

485

189

8412

00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96


No solar control With interior shades



2140 2140 20371690

1115680

29432

18391214

843

521

221

9921

00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96

2140 2135 19941560

914428

86 4

1475964

609

261

123

28

0 00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96


No solar control With exterior shades



2140 2140 20371690

1115680

29432

18391214

843

521

221

9921

00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96

2140 2124 19741459

749274 41 2

1316838

474

189

81

12

0 00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96


No solar control With exterior shades and solar control coating



2140 2140 20371690

1115680

29432

18391214

843

521

221

9921

00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96

2140 2121 19671439

725262 33 1

1295816

455

180

7612

0 00

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

T > 68 T > 72 T > 76 T > 80 T > 84 T > 88 T > 92 T > 96

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNDaylighting

Rule of Thumb

11

2.5 2.5

Head ofwindow

Cross-section of window

daylightcontrol

solar andglare control

10’10’

16’ 16’

Head ofwindow

8’

Cross-section of typical studio space

CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGNControls and Automation

Systems to be controlledShadingWindowsMechanicalLighting

Questions to askManual vs. automatedInterdependency (‘lockout’)OwnershipWhole-building vs. zoned

Building Enclosure Upgrades – Impetus

• Relevant IEQ Survey Results• Majority of occupant workspaces are within 15ft. of exterior walls or windows• Common complaints of poor temperature control

• Too hot/humid/cold during warm weather• Too cold during cool weather

• Majority of occupants dissatisfied with thermalcomfort


CLIMATE ANALYSIS & PASSIVE DESIGN

Building Enclosure

Building Enclosure Upgrades – Exterior Walls

• Insulation / vapor retarder benefits• Reduced energy use• Possible increase in occupant comfort• Potential improvement in air tightness

• Potential drawbacks• Reduced wall temperatures during cold weather• Moisture accumulation

• Condensation within walls• Wet masonry => Exterior staining



Building Enclosure


Insulation andvapor retarder



Building Enclosure



Building Enclosure



Moisture accumulation


Building Enclosure




Building Enclosure


Building Enclosure Upgrades – Windows

• Concerns• Primary concern is contribution to buildingcooling loads• Secondary concern is occupant comfort• Tertiary concern is winter heating load• Restoration of wood frames and othercomponents can address operability and watertightness but not thermal issues


Building Enclosure


Building Enclosure Upgrades – Roof

• Evaluation• Need for replacement is uncertain• Slate roofing is extremely durable and provideslongevity when properly designed/constructed

• Staining issues can likely be remedied and areaesthetic only

• Presence or absence of insulation to bedetermined


Building Enclosure




Acoustics

Sources of Noise

shop

mechanical rooms

public gathering spaces

studios (individual vs group work conflicts)

street noise

exterior mechanical equipment

Acoustically Sensitive Programs

classrooms

library



Acoustics

E XT . S TAIR E XT . S T AIR

E XT . S T AIR

CLO

SE

T

C LOS E T

V E S T IB ULE

ME C H.

C LAS S R OOM

S LIDE

LIB R AR Y

S LIDELIB R AR Y

201B

201A 2CLS

1

201C

2CLS

2

M2001

204

206

206A

202

S T AIR

K IT C HE N

C LOS E T

2P S 1LOB B Y

LOB B Y2P S 2

UP

LIB R AR Y

E LE V

LE C T UR E201

UP

DN DN

DN

S HOP

OF F IC E

OF F IC E

C OR R IDOR

LOB B Y

S TOR AG E

C OR R IDOR

DIG IT ALOUT P UT LAB

ME C H.

DR AWING B OAR D C AF E

ME C H.

OF F IC EP R INT S HOP

C LAS S R OOM

OF F IC E

110A

110

121119 117 115 113 111 109 107 105

M1001

1CLS

1

1C LS 2

104

101

101A

J100

2

103

M1002

123 125

116A

129127 131

116B 118 120

131A

122P 1002

1C R D1

102

S T AIR

1P S 1

1C R D2

1P S 2E L. LOB B Y

OF F IC EOF F IC EOF F IC E

OF F IC E OF F IC E OF F IC E OF F IC E OF F IC E

F AC ULT Y OP E R AT IONS

OF F IC E OF F IC E OF F IC E

OF F IC E OF F IC E

S T OR AG E

OF F IC E

ME C H.

J 1001J ANIT OR

R 1001WWOME N

R 1002MME NM1003

ME C HANIC AL

E 1001E LE C T .

M1004ME C H.

1HW1HALL

E LE V .

K IT C HE N

C HAS EOF F IC E

114A 114BOF F IC E

UP UP

UP

E LE V .ME C H.

E XT . S T AIR E XT . S T AIR

E XT . S T AIR

E XT . S TAIR E XT . S T AIR

E XT . S T AIR

ME N WOME N

S T OR AG E

C LAS S R OOM

OF F IC E

C LAS S R OOM301

303B 303 303A305

304A

304

308 310306

302

R 3001M

3ST

W3

3S T W2

R 3002W

3ST

W4

3P S 2 LOB B Y

LOB B Y3P S 1

OF F IC E OF F IC E

OF F IC E

OF F IC EOF F IC EOF F IC EC LAS S R OOM

DNDN

UPUP

(316)

E LE V

3S TW1

E XT . S TAIR E XT . S TAIR

E XT . S T AIR

ME C H.

C OR R IDORC LAS S R OOM

OF F IC E

M4001

404

403 405 411

4024S TW1

4E LE V 1

4S TW2

4P S 1 LOB B Y

4C R D1

C LAS S R OOM

C LAS S R OOM OF F IC E

DN DN

E LE V

UP UP

C LAS S R OOM401

407?C LAS S R OOM?

S TAIRS TAIR

S T UDIO

CO

RR

IDO

R

DE S IG N LAB DE S IG N LAB(open to floor below) (open to floor below)502

501

503

S TAIR

5P S 1 LOB B Y

5CR

D1

E LE V

C HAS E ?

C HAS E ?

C HAS E ?

C HAS E ?

S T AIRDN DN

E XT . S T AIR

1

2

3

4

5



Acoustics: Interior Materials

acoustic plaster

glass/mineral fiber battmineral fiber ceiling tile

wood fiber acoustic panelscarpet

wood & fiberglass panels

fabric wrapped fiber board


systems


SYSTEMS

MEP Sytems at RMH and on Campus

1.1. Through Wall PTAC2.2. Ducted Central Station HVAC Unit3.3. Fan Coil Unit4.4. Heat and Exhaust Only5.5. Unconditioned (Heat Only)


SYSTEMS



SYSTEMS


60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Elec

tric

Dem

and

(kV

A)

Richardson Memorial Electric Demand (kVA), 7/1/2004-7/1/2005

7/1/

2005

7/1/

2004

6/1/

2005

5/1/

2005

4/1/

2005

3/1/

2005

2/1/

2005

1/1/

2005

12/1

/200

4

11/1

/200

4

10/1

/200

4

9/1/

2004

8/1/

2004


SYSTEMS

Energy Data & Peak Use at RMH

Thermal Complaints

Asymmetric Thermal Radiation


SYSTEMS

Thermal Complaints

``

Existing and Projected MeteringService Presently Metered? Proposed Metering?

Electric Yes YesSteam No YesChilled Water No YesDomestic Water No Yes

IBM Smart Building Program• Dashboard• Realtime energy analysis• Historical data Smart Building Program Implementation

Energy Metering• By Source?• By system?• By zones?


SYSTEMS

Existing & Projected Metering

Baseline Energy Model• Compare Baseline Energy Use to Proposed Energy Use• Baseline – ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Appendix G• Proposed – System types may incorporate heat

recovery, displacement ventilation, natural ventilation,central systems, distributed systems, etc.

• Target Energy Reduction:– TU Target: 24% energy cost savings on major

renovation projects– LEED Target: EAc1 - 9 points (24% savings)


SYSTEMS

Baseline Energy Model

Baseline Energy Model• Process:

– Export Revit file (gbXML) to Autodesk Green BuildingStudio, then import into eQUEST. Run simulations ineQUEST.

– Alternate: Build model directly in eQUEST.• Simulate Multiple Systems.• Organize output to identify major areas of energy usage :

– Dynamic: HVAC, Lighting, Plug Loads– Static: Chilled Water, Steam


SYSTEMS

Baseline Energy Model


SYSTEMS

Water: Seasonal potable and Non-Potable Water Use

Total Consumption(Gallons)

Potable (Gal.) Non-Potable (Gal.)

Actual Actual Actual

Spring 402,488 34,013 368,475Summer 38,183 3,938 34,245

Fall 358,620 30,180 328,440Total 799,290 68,130 731,160

Based on 3.5 GPF for WC's and 1.5 GPF for Urinals

Season

Actual Water Use


SYSTEMS




LA Plbg Code Table406



Spring 216,083 34,013 182,070Summer 20,894 3,938 16,956

Fall 192,468 30,180 162,288Total 429,444 68,130 361,314


Season

Code Water Use


SYSTEMS




LEED WEReductions

LEED WEReductions

LEED WEReductions

Spring 103,373 34,013 69,360Summer 10,346 3,938 6,408

Fall 92,004 30,180 61,824Total 205,722 68,130 137,592


LEED WE Water UseSeason

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

Actual LA PlbgCode Table

406

LEED WEReductions


406

LEED WEReductions


406

LEED WEReductions

Total Consumption (Gallons) Potable (Gal.) Non-Potable (Gal.)

Spring 402,488 216,083 103,373 34,013 34,013 34,013 368,475 182,070 69,360

Summer 38,183 20,894 10,346 3,938 3,938 3,938 34,245 16,956 6,408

Fall 358,620 192,468 92,004 30,180 30,180 30,180 328,440 162,288 61,824

Total 799,290 429,444 205,722 68,130 68,130 68,130 731,160 361,314 137,592

Pro

jecte

dA

nnualC

onsu

mption

(Gallo

ns)

Actual vs. Code vs. LEED Reductions

Rainwater Harvest Potential - Grey Water Usage


SYSTEMS

Water


SYSTEMS

Lighting

artificial lighting (task)daylighting artificial lighting (general)

dimming/timeclock/scene controls occupancy sensors LED technology

More:personal computerspower & data infrastructurelocations & distribution

Technology:Digital MediaDigital FabricationWireless Connectivity

Energy:Increased Power Usage


SYSTEMS

Information Technology

operations & metrics



OPERATIONS & METRICS

Waste Management BIGGEST WASTE ISSUES Huge amount at end of semester, much is recyclable. > 1 cu.yd/ student/ yr compacted Dining area does not have ability to wash dishes

THUS, disposable dishes big component of waste No composting - SUBSTANTIAL food waste. Shop waste = approx. 1 large dumpster/yr (40. cu. yds)

RECYCLING AT RMH No building recycling policies Recycling containers for bottles, cans and paper Bins located in studios, computer lab, offices

REMOVAL Trash removed via passenger elevator - PROBLEM Chute or freight elevator required Facilities and Unico manage recycling EQUIPMENT Free pick up of electronic equipment bi-weekly Electronics reused or donated to Baton-Rouge non-profit



Facilities Protocols CONSUMABLES

RMH purchased consumables: Coffee and PAPER Students purchase: chipboard, wood, sodas No official “environmental policies” about purchasing TSA meetings with decanted water and china/glassware

CLEANING/ PEST CONTROL Facilities green cleaning policy per LEED EBOM

Pesticides sprayed outside each building monthly Pesticides inside buildings done as last resort Insecticide - Pyrethrums - natural product Round-up is herbicide used - toxicity studies are debated

MAINTENANCE AND ALTERATIONS Low VOC paint policy Fluorescent light bulbs are green-tipped. HEPA filters are replaced monthly

SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT Siemens building management systems

Facilities monitors systems / manages problems Utilities Infrastructure manages RMH equipment

Equipment replaced with wear/ failure Energy efficient equipment for replacements

COMMISSIONING Done on Dinwiddie, not Lavin-Bernick



Commissioning

What is Commissioning?“a quality-oriented process for achieving, verifying, and documenting that the performance of facilities, systems, and assemblies meets defined objectives and criteria” - ASHRAE

What are the benefits of commissioning? • provides safe and healthful environments • optimizes energy use • reduces operating costs • ensures adequate O&M staff training • improves workplace performance due to higher quality environments



LEEDLEED 2009 for New Construction and Major RenovationProject Checklist

15 3 7 Possible Points: 26Y N ?

Y Prereq 1

1 Credit 1 1

5 Credit 2 5

1 Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1

6 Credit 4.1 6

1 Credit 4.2 1

3 Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles 3

1 Credit 4.4 2

1 Credit 5.1 Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat 1

1 Credit 5.2 Site Development—Maximize Open Space 1

1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design—Quantity Control 1

1 Credit 6.2 Stormwater Design—Quality Control 1

1 Credit 7.1 Heat Island Effect—Non-roof 1

1 Credit 7.2 1

1 Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction 1

5 0 5 Possible Points: 10

Y Prereq 1

2 2 Credit 1 Water Efficient Landscaping 2 to 4

2 Reduce by 50% 2

No Potable Water Use or Irrigation 4

2 Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies 2

3 1 Credit 3 2 to 4

Reduce by 30% 2

3 Reduce by 35% 3

Reduce by 40% 4

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

Site Selection

Development Density and Community Connectivity

Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access

Alternative Transportation—Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms

Water Use Reduction

RICHARDSON MEMORIAL HALL SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE - SUSTAINABILITY STUDY

TULANE UNIVERISTY

Sustainable Sites

Water Efficiency

Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity

Heat Island Effect—Roof

Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction



LEED

LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major RenovationProject Checklist

15 3 7 Possible Points: 26Y N ?

Y Prereq 1

1 Credit 1 1

5 Credit 2 5

1 Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1

6 Credit 4.1 6

1 Credit 4.2 1

3 Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles 3

1 Credit 4.4 2

1 Credit 5.1 Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat 1

1 Credit 5.2 Site Development—Maximize Open Space 1

1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design—Quantity Control 1

1 Credit 6.2 Stormwater Design—Quality Control 1

1 Credit 7.1 Heat Island Effect—Non-roof 1

1 Credit 7.2 1

1 Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction 1


Y Prereq 1

2 2 Credit 1 Water Efficient Landscaping 2 to 4

2 Reduce by 50% 2

No Potable Water Use or Irrigation 4

2 Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies 2

3 1 Credit 3 2 to 4

Reduce by 30% 2

3 Reduce by 35% 3

Reduce by 40% 4

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

Site Selection

Development Density and Community Connectivity

Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access

Alternative Transportation—Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms

Water Use Reduction

RICHARDSON MEMORIAL HALL SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE - SUSTAINABILITY STUDY

TULANE UNIVERISTY

Sustainable Sites

Water Efficiency

Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity

Heat Island Effect—Roof

Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction



LEED


Y Prereq 1

Y Prereq 2

Y Prereq 3

6 7 6 Credit 1 1 to 19

Improve by 12% for New Buildings or 8% for Existing Building Renovations 1





6 Improve by 22% for New Buildings or 18% for Existing Building Renovations 6













Improve by 48%+ for New Buildings or 44%+ for Existing Building Renovations 19

7 Credit 2 1 to 7

1% Renewable Energy 1







2 Credit 3 2

2 Credit 4 2

3 Credit 5 3

2 Credit 6 2Green Power

Optimize Energy Performance

On-Site Renewable Energy

Energy and Atmosphere

Enhanced Commissioning

Enhanced Refrigerant Management

Measurement and Verification

Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems

Minimum Energy Performance

Fundamental Refrigerant Management


Y Prereq 1

Y Prereq 2

Y Prereq 3

6 7 6 Credit 1 1 to 19




















7 Credit 2 1 to 7








2 Credit 3 2

2 Credit 4 2

3 Credit 5 3












Y Prereq 1

Y Prereq 2

Y Prereq 3

6 7 6 Credit 1 1 to 19




















7 Credit 2 1 to 7








2 Credit 3 2

2 Credit 4 2

3 Credit 5 3













LEED9 3 2 Possible Points: 14

Y Prereq 1

2 1 Credit 1.1 1 to 3

Reuse 55% 1

2 Reuse 75% 2

Reuse 95% 3

1 Credit 1.2 Building Reuse—Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 1

2 Credit 2 1 to 2

50% Recycled or Salvaged 1

2 75% Recycled or Salvaged 2

2 Credit 3 1 to 2

Reuse 5% 1

Reuse 10% 2

2 Credit 4 1 to 2

10% of Content 1

2 20% of Content 2

2 Credit 5 1 to 2

10% of Materials 1

2 20% of Materials 2

1 Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials 1

1 Credit 7 1


Y Prereq 1

Y Prereq 2

1 Credit 1 1

1 Credit 2 1

1 Credit 3.1 1

1 Credit 3.2 1

1 Credit 4.1 1

1 Credit 4.2 1

1 Credit 4.3 1

1 Credit 4.4 1

1 Credit 5 1

1 Credit 6.1 Controllability of Systems—Lighting 1

1 Credit 6.2 1

1 Credit 7.1 1

1 Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort—Verification 1

1 Credit 8.1 1

1 Credit 8.2 1

Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control

Controllability of Systems—Thermal Comfort

Thermal Comfort—Design

Daylight and Views—Daylight

Daylight and Views—Views

Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products

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

Recycled Content

Regional Materials

Certified Wood

Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring

Storage and Collection of Recyclables

Building Reuse—Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof

Construction Waste Management

Materials Reuse

Materials and Resources

Indoor Environmental Quality



LEED


Y Prereq 1

2 1 Credit 1.1 1 to 3

Reuse 55% 1

2 Reuse 75% 2

Reuse 95% 3

1 Credit 1.2 Building Reuse—Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 1

2 Credit 2 1 to 2

50% Recycled or Salvaged 1

2 75% Recycled or Salvaged 2

2 Credit 3 1 to 2

Reuse 5% 1

Reuse 10% 2

2 Credit 4 1 to 2

10% of Content 1

2 20% of Content 2

2 Credit 5 1 to 2

10% of Materials 1

2 20% of Materials 2

1 Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials 1

1 Credit 7 1


Y Prereq 1

Y Prereq 2

1 Credit 1 1

1 Credit 2 1

1 Credit 3.1 1

1 Credit 3.2 1

1 Credit 4.1 1

1 Credit 4.2 1

1 Credit 4.3 1

1 Credit 4.4 1

1 Credit 5 1

1 Credit 6.1 Controllability of Systems—Lighting 1

1 Credit 6.2 1

1 Credit 7.1 1

1 Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort—Verification 1

1 Credit 8.1 1

1 Credit 8.2 1

Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control

Controllability of Systems—Thermal Comfort

Thermal Comfort—Design

Daylight and Views—Daylight

Daylight and Views—Views

Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products

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

Recycled Content

Regional Materials

Certified Wood

Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring

Storage and Collection of Recyclables

Building Reuse—Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof

Construction Waste Management

Materials Reuse

Materials and Resources

Indoor Environmental Quality



LEED


1 Credit 1.1 1

1 Credit 1.2 1

1 Credit 1.3 1

1 Credit 1.4 1

1 Credit 1.5 1

1 Credit 2 1


1 Credit 1.1 1

1 Credit 1.2 1

1 Credit 1.3 1

1 Credit 1.4 1

62 21 26 Possible Points: 110TotalCertified 40 to 49 points Silver 50 to 59 points Gold 60 to 79 points Platinum 80 to 110

LEED Accredited Professional

MR Cr.2 - Construction Waste Management (75%)

SS Cr.6.1 - Stormwater Design Quantity Control

SS Cr.6.2 - Stormwater Design Quality Control

Regional Priority: Specific Credit

Innovation and Design Process

Regional Priority Credits

Sustainability Education Program

Green Housekeeping Program

Exemplary Performance in Construction Waste Management

Ergonomic Assesment and Furniture

Mold control/ prevention or Other



2030 CHALLENGE

2030 CHALLENGE Targets: U.S. National Averages

50% Target 60% Target 70% Target 80% Target 90% Target

Administrative / Professional &Government Office

Education 170 63% 76 38.0 30.4 22.8 15.2 7.6

College / University (campus-level) 280 63% 120 60.0 48.0 36.0 24.0 12.0

K-12 School

Food Sales 681 86% 225 112.5 90.0 67.5 45.0 22.5

Convenience Store(with or without gas station)

753 90% 241 120.5 96.4 72.3 48.2 24.1

Grocery Store / Food Market

Food Service 786 59% 351 175.5 140.4 105.3 70.2 35.1

Fast Food 1306 64% 534 267.0 213.6 160.2 106.8 53.4

Restaurant / Cafeteria 612 53% 302 151.0 120.8 90.6 60.4 30.2

Health Care: Inpatient (Specialty Hospitals, Excluding Children's)

468 47% 227 113.5 90.8 68.1 45.4 22.7

Hospital (Acute Care, Children's)

Health Care: Long Term Care(Nursing Home / Assisted Living)

225 54% 124 62.0 49.6 37.2 24.8 12.4

Health Care: Outpatient 183 72% 73 36.5 29.2 21.9 14.6 7.3

Clinic / Other Outpatient Health 219 76% 84 42.0 33.6 25.2 16.8 8.4

Medical Office

Lodging 194 61% 87 43.5 34.8 26.1 17.4 8.7

Dormitory / Fraternity / Sorority

Hotel, Motel or Inn

Mall (Strip Mall and Enclosed) 271 71% 107 53.5 42.8 32.1 21.4 10.7

Office

Bank / Financial Institution

Public Assembly 143 57% 66 33.0 26.4 19.8 13.2 6.6

Entertainment / Culture 265 63% 95 47.5 38.0 28.5 19.0 9.5

Library 246 59% 104 52.0 41.6 31.2 20.8 10.4

Recreation 136 55% 65 32.5 26.0 19.5 13.0 6.5

Social / Meeting 102 57% 52 26.0 20.8 15.6 10.4 5.2

Public Order and Safety 189 57% 90 45.0 36.0 27.0 18.0 9.0

Fire Station / Police Station 157 56% 78 39.0 31.2 23.4 15.6 7.8

Courthouse

U.S. Averages for Site Energy Use and 2030 Challenge Energy Reduction Targets by Space/Building Type1

Primary Space / Building Type2

Average Site EUI4

(kBtu/Sq.Ft./Yr)

Available inTarget Finder3

Average Source EUI4

(kBtu/Sq.Ft./Yr)

Average PercentElectric

2030 Challenge Site EUI Targets (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Yr)

From the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Use this chart to find the site fossil-fuel energy targets

Source: ©2006-2010 2030 Inc. / Architecture 2030 Data Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Energy Information Administration

60% GHG emissions reduction by 2010 - Avg EUI of 48.0 kBtu/sf/yr70% GHG emissions reduction by 2015 - Avg EUI of 36.0 kBtu/sf/yr80% GHG emissions reduction by 2020 - Avg EUI of 24.0 kBtu/sf/yr



2030 CHALLENGE

Meeting the 2030 Challenge Through Building Codes 4

Table A: 2030 Challenge Interim Code Equivalents

NOTE: Table A above represents a set of guidelines. Each entity should assess its particular code and building energy consumption patterns and adjust the code equivalents provided in the table as appropriate. For example, those entities with aggressive GHG and energy reduction initiatives may want to increase the recommended percentage reductions. Entities with detailed information on code performance compared to their building stock are encouraged to adjust the percentage reductions to meet the 2030 Challenge targets.

CODE / STANDARD RESIDENTIALCOMMERCIAL

NBI Option19 (prescriptive path)

EC - 154EECC Option18 (prescriptive path)

GBI Standard (in progress)17

LEED 2009 (in progress)

65 or less RESNET HERS Index

HERS Index: 65LEED NC 2.2 / Homes

California Title 24 2008

25% - 30% below16Washington Energy Code

ASHRAE 90.1-2004

ASHRAE 189 (in progress)

ASHRAE 90.1-2007

IECC 2006 30% below

30% below

0

25% below

30% below

New - Core Performancew/ enhanced measures

PATH A, 8.1.1.1: 150pts

New - EA Credit #1: 7 ptsRenovation - EA Credit #1: 9pts


10% below14

25% below

25% below 30% below Oregon Energy Code15

15% - 20% below13California Title 24 2005

13 The City of Santa Barbara established meeting the 2030 Challenge target for single-family residential units at 20% below Title 24 and, for high-rise residential, at 15% below Title 24.14 Based on preliminary code analysis for the California Energy Commission by Charles Eley of Architectural Energy Corporation.15 Oregon Department of Energy, “Comparison of Oregon Energy Code 2005 & ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004”.16 For residential buildings east of the Cascade Mountains, use 25% below. For residential buildings west of the Cascades, use 30% below.17 Green Building Initiative, Proposed American National Standard 01-2008P.18 Alliance to Save Energy, Energy Efficient Codes Coalition (EECC), “The 30% Solution”/EC-154. This option provides a method for modifying the prescriptive path of the code to meet or exceed the 2030 Challenge 50% reduction target. 19 New Buildings Institute, Advanced Buildings Core Performance Guide with enhanced measures. This option provides a method for modifying the prescriptive path of the code to meet or exceed the 2030 Challenge 50% reduction target.

Meeting the 2030 Challenge Through Building Codes 4

Table A: 2030 Challenge Interim Code Equivalents

NOTE: Table A above represents a set of guidelines. Each entity should assess its particular code and building energy consumption patterns and adjust the code equivalents provided in the table as appropriate. For example, those entities with aggressive GHG and energy reduction initiatives may want to increase the recommended percentage reductions. Entities with detailed information on code performance compared to their building stock are encouraged to adjust the percentage reductions to meet the 2030 Challenge targets.

CODE / STANDARD RESIDENTIALCOMMERCIAL

NBI Option19 (prescriptive path)

EC - 154EECC Option18 (prescriptive path)

GBI Standard (in progress)17

LEED 2009 (in progress)

65 or less RESNET HERS Index

HERS Index: 65LEED NC 2.2 / Homes

California Title 24 2008

25% - 30% below16Washington Energy Code

ASHRAE 90.1-2004

ASHRAE 189 (in progress)

ASHRAE 90.1-2007

IECC 2006 30% below

30% below

0

25% below

30% below

New - Core Performancew/ enhanced measures

PATH A, 8.1.1.1: 150pts



10% below14

25% below

25% below 30% below Oregon Energy Code15

15% - 20% below13California Title 24 2005

13 The City of Santa Barbara established meeting the 2030 Challenge target for single-family residential units at 20% below Title 24 and, for high-rise residential, at 15% below Title 24.14 Based on preliminary code analysis for the California Energy Commission by Charles Eley of Architectural Energy Corporation.15 Oregon Department of Energy, “Comparison of Oregon Energy Code 2005 & ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004”.16 For residential buildings east of the Cascade Mountains, use 25% below. For residential buildings west of the Cascades, use 30% below.17 Green Building Initiative, Proposed American National Standard 01-2008P.18 Alliance to Save Energy, Energy Efficient Codes Coalition (EECC), “The 30% Solution”/EC-154. This option provides a method for modifying the prescriptive path of the code to meet or exceed the 2030 Challenge 50% reduction target. 19 New Buildings Institute, Advanced Buildings Core Performance Guide with enhanced measures. This option provides a method for modifying the prescriptive path of the code to meet or exceed the 2030 Challenge 50% reduction target.

A 50% GHG emissions reduction (pre-2010 goal) = 25% below ASHRAE 90.1-2007 = 9 LEED 2009 EA Points

Buildings Energy Data Book: 3.9 Educational Facilities October 2009

3.9.1 2003 Delivered Energy End-Use Intensities and Consumption of Educational Facilities, by Building Activity (1

(10^12 Btu) (thousand Btu/SF)Space Heating 389 47% 39.4 Cooling 79 10% 8.0 Ventilation 83 10% 8.4 Water Heating 57 7% 5.8 Lighting 113 14% 11.5 Cooking 8 1% 0.8 Refrigeration 16 2% 1.6 Office Equipment 4 0% 0.4 Computers 32 4% 4.0 Other 39 5% 3.4 Total 820 100% 83.1

Note(s): 1) Educational facilities include K-12 as well as higher education facilities. 2) Due to rounding, sum does not add up to total.Source(s): EIA, 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption and Expenditures End-Uses, Sept. 2008, Table E1A and E2A.

3.9.2 2003-2004 Number of Public K-12 Schools in the United States and Students per School

Number of Schools (2004-2005) Average Number of Students per School (2003-2004) (3)Regular (1) 86,487 Elementary 438Special 1,635 Middle 616Vocational 326 High 758Alternative 4,847 Other 266Total (2) 93,295

Note(s): 1) Regular schools are those responsible for providing free public education for school-age children residing within their jurisdiction.2) Data is based on total number of schools reporting current student enrollment, which varies from the actual number of schools,96,296. Special focuses primarily on special education with materials and instructional approaches to meet the needs of thestudents. A vocational school focuses on technical or career skills and training. An alternative school addresses the needs of students that typically cannot be met in a traditional school setting. 3) Averages are for regular schools.

Source(s): U.S. Department of Education/National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), Public Elementary and Secondary Students, Staff, Schools, and School Districts: School Year 2003-04, Feb. 2006, Table 1, p. 3 and Table 8, p. 19.

3.9.3 National Enrollment and Expenditures for Public K-12 Facilities ($2006)

Enrollment Expenditures(millions) ($billion) Expenditures per Pupil

1986 39.42 254.0 6,444 1990 40.54 301.9 7,446 1995 44.11 330.2 7,484 2000 46.86 389.5 8,313 2003 48.18 433.7 9,000 2005 48.56 454.0 9,405 2010 49.27 507.8 10,419 2015 50.74 597.6 11,779

Source(s): NCES, Projections of Educational Statistics to 2016, Sept. 2006, Table 33, p. 82 for 1990-2014; NCES, Projections of Educational Statistics to 2011, Oct. 2001, Table 33, p. 88 for 1986; and EIA, Annual Energy Review 2007, June 2008, Appendix D, p. 377 for price inflators.

3-36

EUI breakdown for Typical Educational Facility(national avg. source: DOE - Buildings Energy Data Book 2009)



BENCHMARKING

51

63

70

76

83

65

74

52

64

NREL Model Medium Office (New)DOE Commercial Benchmarks

NREL Model Medium Office (Post 1980)DOE Commercial Benchmarks

NREL Model Medium Office (Pre 1980)DOE Commercial Benchmarks

Buildings with Principal Bldg Activity ‐ Education*CBECS 2003

Buildings with Principal Bldg Activity ‐ Office*CBECS 2003

Buildings with Floor space 25,000‐50,000*CBECS 2003

All Bldgs Constructed 2000‐2003*CBECS 2003

Dinwidde, Tulane University

RMH, Tulane University

30

34

59

59

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Rinker Hall (School of Construction) at the University of Florida…

Heifer International Headquarters**Commercial Office

The Balzer Theater at Herren's**Rehabilitated historic building with offices and restaurant

Mgmt Bldg at Georgia Tech**Aud, classrooms, offices, bookstore, retail

Total Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/sf)

*CBECS data do not distinguish between dry and humid. New Orleans is considered to be Climate Zone 5, with CDD 2000 and HDD<4000.**These buildings are in climate zone 3A, classified by ASHRAE as warm and humid.



BENCHMARKINGWARREN HALL - CORNELL UNIVERSITY

SUSTAINABILITY GOALS

LEED Silver Upgrade all systems (including adding A/C) with no net energy use increase

OR: Energy 50% below ASHRAE 90.1 – 2007

SUSTAINABILITY ACHIEVEMENTS

Anticipated LEED Gold at minimum, Platinum likely

Energy Usage - Baseline: 95.9 kBtu/GSF/yr Anticipated Performance: 52.2 kBtu/GSF/yr (50.3% Energy Cost below baseline)

Anticipated 19 of 19 points in LEED EAcr1



RMH Goals

DESIGN AS A TOOL FOR PEOPLE AND PLANET

OUT OF THE BOX

RESPONSIVE TO OCCUPANTS

PEDAGOGICAL

REASONABLE AND UNREASONABLE

FORWARD THINKING

INTEGRATES OPERATIONS

AMBITIOUS

CONSIDER COST AND PHASING

PRECEDENT SETTING FOR CAMPUS AND COMMUNITY

GROWTH AND CHANGE

HOLISTIC

SYNERGISTIC




12:00-12:10

12:10-12:20

12:50-1:05

1:05-1:30

1:30-1:50

1:50-2:00






Introduction





12:35-12:50

12:20-12:35

el dorado/SGH

FXFOWLE / el dorado

Architecture

Occupancy/Survey



2

1


4

6

5

7

Break 3:45-4:00 pm



Dinner 7:00-9:30 pm


8

10

9

11

12



Break 10:15-10:30 am




TGIW 5:00 pm





12:00-12:10

12:10-12:20

12:50-1:05

1:05-1:30

1:30-1:50

1:50-2:00






Introduction





12:35-12:50

12:20-12:35

el dorado/SGH

FXFOWLE / el dorado

Architecture

Occupancy/Survey



2

1


4

6

5

7

Break 3:45-4:00 pm



Dinner 7:00-9:30 pm


8

10

9

11

12



Break 10:15-10:30 am




TGIW 5:00 pm





12:00-12:10

12:10-12:20

12:50-1:05

1:05-1:30

1:30-1:50

1:50-2:00






Introduction





12:35-12:50

12:20-12:35

el dorado/SGH

FXFOWLE / el dorado

Architecture

Occupancy/Survey



2

1


4

6

5

7

Break 3:45-4:00 pm



Dinner 7:00-9:30 pm


8

10

9

11

12



Break 10:15-10:30 am




TGIW 5:00 pm



CONCLUSION

What’s next?


CONCLUSION

What’s next?

TUES2:30-3:45

TUES4:00-5:15

WED9:00-10:15

WED10:30-11:45



Systems

Climate andEnvelope



Systems

Climate andEnvelope



Systems

Climate andEnvelope



Systems

Climate andEnvelope

1 2 3 4 5Dan Maginn Pete Pesce Steve Salzer Ilana Judah Guy Geier



Systems

Climate andEnvelope

group group group group group

Q & A


CONCLUSION

Q & A

richardson memorial hall charrette presentation

Documents

doradosgh fxfowle

fxfowlef x f o w

pm21breakout groups

pmbreakout groups

ambreakout groups

sustainable future guy

pmfinal report day

richardson memorial