TENDER LOVING CARE WELL v2 CERTIFICATION FOR TLC ENGINEERING FOR ARCHITECTURE:

ORLANDO RENOVATION

Ashley Bowers | DCP 4290 | Bahar Armaghani | August 2018

Citrus Center, Home to TLC Offices Orlando

BOWERS | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 3

GREEN BUILDING 5

EMPATHIC DESIGN 7

WELL BUILDING STANDARD™ 8

WELL V2™ 10

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING 14

AIR 15

WATER 20

NOURISHMENT 22

LIGHT 25

MOVEMENT 27

THERMAL COMFORT 29

SOUND 32

MATERIALS 33

MIND AND COMMUNITY 34

COST-BENEFIT CONCLUSION 35

TLC ENGINEERING FOR ARCHITECTURE AND WELLV2 | FINAL SUMMARY 37

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES 39

BOWERS | PAGE 3

INTRODUCTION

The earth’s surface has altered dramatically since humans evolved the capabilities

to form their own destiny. Skyscrapers rose where trees fell. Asphalt replaced fertile

soil. The atmosphere bloated with gases from our productivity. This is abominable,

but I approach these uncomfortable truths as opportunities. Technology viewed in its

basic form is human intuition overcoming obstacles. Today, we are overwhelmed

with an array of setbacks unfolding before us that are further complicated by our own

social organization. But, when we reflect on our accomplishments as a species, we

possess prodigious consciousness and incredible capabilities, more so than any other

being that ever existed. Technological solutions are out there and we can achieve

them with our collective reasoning and potential.

My capstone discusses the sector that I have studied over my career at the

University of Florida, the built environment. This may seem just a miniscule sliver of

the whole society, however, improving how we build will influence nearly everything

else we as humans produce. It will advance how we live, work, learn, and play.

Humans spend over 90% of their lives indoors10. However, I learned from my time

studying the built environment to challenge myself to think outside the building, and

reevaluate my opinion on what is indoors. I now view the built environment not as a

separate dimension from the outside, but simply as the space which humans occupy

within nature.

BOWERS | 4

I spent my last collegiate summer interning with the Orlando division of TLC

Engineering for Architecture. This proved to be the pinnacle of my course in

sustainability thus far. I was instilled not only with professional experience necessary

to catapult me into a career, but I also learned a great deal about how we construct

places and how we can improve them. The best way I thought of giving back to the

organization was to center my senior capstone around certifying the space on a

standard that is founded on the health of its occupants, the WELL Building Standard.

Certifying their major renovations under the latest version of WELL would ensure the

offices remain clean, naturalistic spaces for the employees who I have grown to know

and care for over the summer.

This paper explains why WELL and other green building certifications are guides

to constructing sustainable spaces for humans in the future. It also covers why

earning building certifications is a smart long-term economic solution, and how years

of research prove occupant health should be a design priority. Finally, I define the

clear steps I took to help TLC earn their WELL v.2 certification in 2019 so other

projects may follow.

BOWERS | PAGE 5

GREEN BUILDING

History tells us the pursuit of comfort, security, and convenience drives all

technological progress. These goals combined with cultural creativity, complexity,

and architecture results in the towering cityscapes seen around the world. Although

beautiful, the industrialism and development of this sector is responsible for nearly

half of the world’s energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions1.

As stated previously, humans have a historical record of overcoming problems

with scientific ingenuity. Our current democratic structure does present its own

unique obstacles for progress, however, slowly we manage to create policy that

guides construction towards green practices. The IECC 2012, Florida Energy Code,

and ASHRAE 90.1 clearly define requirements in shaping a building’s overall

45%21%

34%

Fig. 1 U.S. CO2e by Sector

Buildings Industry Transportation

42%

6%

16%

12%

24%

Fig. 2 U.S. Energy Consumption by Sector

Building Operations

Building Construction and Materials

Transportation-Light Duty (auto SUV, pickup, minivan)

Transportation-Other (rail, bus, truck, ship)

Industry

Figure 1 (Above): Information provided by U.S. Energy Administration

Figure 2 (Right): Information provided by U.S. Energy Administration

BOWERS | 6

performance, including envelope focus, orientation design, energy modeling, and

water efficiency2,3,4. Regulations such as these translate to energy savings, providing

owners direct economic benefits. Additionally, restrictions ensure environmental

welfare by lowering overall greenhouse gases. This incredible advancement can be

credited to the tenacity of officials who see the potential profit gains to be had by

building green.

The energy savings I’ve described manifest quickly after green practices are

implemented. Immediate rewards are highly sought after, which is likely why these

policies were the first to be passed in legislation. However, the quintessential essence

of sustainability is the future; the only reason we protect the environment is for the

generations of tomorrow. Therefore, long-term thinking is essential when

approaching any new project in today’s world. Instant gratification can be dangerous

because it distracts from true payoff that can occur with more initial investment of

time, money, and brainpower. The future of architecture is not merely “smart-

buildings” that talk, although this is an exciting taste of prospective living. The destiny

for the design of buildings lies in the architect’s change of perspective away from

budgetary savings and fanciful-tech, and towards the occupant and environment

which the structure serves.

BOWERS | PAGE 7

EMPATHIC DESIGN

Buildings are constructed for an infinite variety of purposes— education,

employment, communication, dining, gaming, just to name a few. But what if

buildings were not built for functions, but rather for the betterment of its occupants?

Imagine a school designed to increase children’s ability to learn, or a business meant

to foster office workers’ productivity. Rather than creating a conference room simply

because employees need a place to conduct meetings, why not arrange a flexible

space that inspires brainstorming, improves cognitive function, and provides

comfort?

The method of designing from the point of view of the user is called empathic

design. It is most often used in product or service development, but certainly has

advantages in architecture as well. Buildings that incorporate subtle design elements

to meet the needs of its occupants are enjoyed by diverse audiences, and soar above

any conventional structure built just to the owner’s project requirements.

Few buildings are designed with occupant’s welfare in mind. When architects

divert attention to reducing costs, they miss the larger picture of why buildings are

constructed in the first place—comfort and security of occupants. There has been vast

research proving enhanced environmental quality increases occupant satisfaction

and productivity, reducing turnover and absenteeism6. A study conducted in London

found 85% of the total corporate operation costs are personnel costs7.

BOWERS | 8

Aside from mandatory regional building standards, voluntary certification

systems, such as the popular USGBC LEED® Rating System, guide empathic and green

design practices. The latest version of LEED® includes specific goals aimed at

sustainable construction and operation. Their point system includes features that

reverse contribution to global climate change, protect water resources and ecosystem

services, and build a greener economy5. The rating system also aims to protect human

health and well-being by including the credit category “Indoor Environmental

Quality”. Credits include thermal comfort, indoor air quality, acoustic performance,

daylighting, and natural views. Project managers (PMs) that follow LEED® guidelines

can

be sure that they will meet their occupants’ needs. However, Indoor Environmental

Quality is only one category of LEED® and the majority of points in the entire rating

system are weighted in favor of energy credits, rather than ones surrounding

occupant comfort. If a PM’s primary goal is the occupant, WELL Building Standard™

is the rating system to follow.

WELL BUILDING STANDARD™

The International WELL Building Institute™ (IWBI) delivers the WELL

Building Standard™, an alternate voluntary certification system aimed to enhance

building practices for inhabitants. It is the first of its kind that focuses solely on the

health and wellness of its occupants8. Similar to the LEED® Rating System, WELL™ is

based on a point system utilizing performance metrics, green strategies, and building

policies to be assessed by a Green Business Certification Inc. (GBCI) representative

BOWERS | PAGE 9

upon completion of all requirements. Where LEED® maintains a strong focus on

energy, water, and refrigerant use, WELL® measures performance based on a

building’s encouragement of healthy, active lifestyles and reduction of exposure to

harmful chemicals and pollutants. The system is founded on rigorous 7 years of

scientific and technical research8. WELL Building Standard® ventured to create a

baseline of practices to ensure and benchmark wellness in the built environment.

The first version of the system,

launched in 2014, included seven

categories of wellness called Concepts; air,

water, nourishment, light, fitness, comfort,

and mind. Credits fall into either

preconditions, which are mandatory for

certification, or optimizations, which total

to the projects’ certification level—silver,

gold, or platinum—and projects are

encouraged to strive for as many

optimizations as possible. The premiere

version also creatively pairs a single or

several bodily systems—cardiovascular,

digestive, endocrine, immune, integumentary, muscular, nervous, reproductive,

respiratory, skeletal, and urinary— to each credit (Fig. 3). This clearly demonstrates

how the credits improve and ensure the health of occupants. For example, the rating

Figure 3: An example from WELL v1’s bodily

connections to their precondition for smoking ban. The

only way to protect people from secondhand and

thirdhand smoke is to implement a 100% smoke-free

environment9.

BOWERS | 10

system includes credits aimed to limit the presence of Volatile Organic Compounds

(VOCs) and particulate matter in the ambient air to prevent damage to lungs, heart,

and blood vessels (respiratory and cardiovascular) 8. This is a prime example of

empathic architectural design.

WELL Building Standard™ offers variable rating systems within the program

to cater to different building types, called pilot standards. These include multifamily

residential, educational facilities, retail, restaurant, commercial kitchens, exercise

facilities, public assembly, and healthcare. Surprisingly, office spaces and

transportation hubs were absent from the list of pilot standards. While WELL v1 is

incredibly robust, but there were certainly improvements to be made, which is why

the IWBI released WELL v2™ in June of 2018 (just in time for this project).

WELL v2™

Four years after its premiere standard in 2014, IWBI introduced their second

version of WELL™. They maintain their “holistic view of health… as not only a state of

being free of disease - which is indeed a fundamental component of health - but also

of the enjoyment of productive lives from which we derive happiness and

satisfaction”9. We spend nearly all of our lives indoors, so it is crucial these spaces not

only serve their function, but excel in health, happiness, and wellness. IWBI wanted

to make this goal possible for anyone who realized the need for healthy spaces, so

they produced a tool for the global community, while remaining true to local health

concerns and cultural norms9. WELL v2™ is founded on six principles; equity,

BOWERS | PAGE 11

globalization, evidence-structured, technical robustness, customer focus, and

resiliency9. These fundamental ethics make up the skeleton of WELL v2; each

precondition and optimization was written with these in mind.

IWBI prioritized ease and accessibility in WELLv2™ to pander to their users.

All previous iterations of pilot standards were joined into one WELL for all project

types9. How is it possible the entire standard remains relevant to every project?

WELLv2™ is dynamic and customizable. It takes advantage of the modernity and

capabilities of the internet, instituting a platform called WELL Online (Fig. 4) which

develops a unique scorecard for every proposal with applicable optimizations that

can be replaced and refined based on the team’s needs. Upon initial registration,

Figure 4: Screen cap of WELL Online. Highlights from top to bottom: From the user’s dashboard is the custom scorecard. The left

tool bar indicates the category and conveniently shows the total points possible and the preconditions and optimizations within

that category. The customize menu bar allows the user to further select optimizations to cater to their project.

BOWERS | 12

projects may choose to either select their own credits or have the system generate

them automatically. Later, a convenient “customize” menu (Fig. 4) appears on the

bottom of the scorecard to further cater the credits to the project. Preconditions are

consistently mandatory to all projects to preserve the rigor of the system.

The quantity of concepts grew from seven to ten in WELLv2™. They include air

water, light, movement, thermal comfort, sound, materials, mind, and community.

The point-based operation remained the same, with weightings relating to each

feature’s intent and impact. Projects must meet all preconditions and earn

optimization points totaling 50, 60, or 80 points to earn silver, gold, or platinum

certification, respectively. There is a separate pathway for core and shell buildings—

at least 2.5% of the floor area just be available for testing and projects may earn 40

points for the base level core certification. All projects may utilize WELL Online for

reference and questions regarding compliance.

WELL Online is a free tool for projects, which is extremely helpful for

conducting preliminary gap analyses. Registration of a WELL v2™ project costs

$1,800, the program and support cost $0.192/sq. ft., and onsite performance testing

and data collection by the GBCI is $8,750. The cost of performance verification may

alternate because this version allows for projects to elect to contract with local

qualified agents for a lower price. For TLC Orlando’s renovation, the total cost of

WELL v2™ will allot to approximately $18,000 and may change if they choose a local

BOWERS | PAGE 13

performance assessor. Although this may seem a steep price, the subsequent section

will demonstrate how the benefits of building well greatly outweigh the costs.

BOWERS | 14

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING

Budget is an obstacle in every sector; design, construction, and planning are

not exempt. Cost often blinds architects from considering the finished product. Nearly

all decisions come down to dollars and cents. This is a shame because most green

implements require greater initial investment, even though they arguably last longer,

are more durable, and offer long-term savings. Sustainability at its core is economic.

There are many interpretations of sustainability, but through my time

studying the field in university, I define it as the quality of being socially and

environmentally favorable for present and future generations. The triple bottom line

is a popular variation of sustainability which includes profitability, however an

important distinction must be made. Decisions conformed for budgetary purposes

against what is best for society and the environment is not sustainable. Most

businesses operate with a laser focus on profit gains and hope for the best outcome

ecologically and culturally. LEED® is an example of an environmentally concentrated

product with society and economy as subservient. This paper attempts to explain

how focusing on the social branch of sustainability translates to enormous

environmental and long-term economic benefits. To evaluate the costs and benefits

of building sustainably with occupant’s health in perspective, I present research from

each of WELLv2’s ten concepts to organize the main objectives of building

sustainably. This will further clarify why WELL provides socially and economically

sound guidelines for designers.

BOWERS | PAGE 15

AIR

90% of our time is spent in enclosed quarters10, and during this time, we take an

average of 18,144 breaths11. Each breath could be tainted with indoor air pollutants

that increase your risk for an array of health problems (Table 1), especially in a poorly

ventilated space.

There is growing evidence supporting the relationship between indoor air quality

(IAQ) and occupant health and well-being. Poor IAQ may lead to short and long-term

health detriments. Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) symptoms can occur immediately

following exposure to indoor pollutants, including fatigue, aches and pains, sensitivity

to odors, and difficulty concentrating12. Presence of pollen, mold, dust, lint, and

animal dander can aggravate allergies and asthma13. After continual exposure, more

Table 1: Common indoor air pollutants, their sources, and health impacts. Information provided from United States EPA11.

BOWERS | 16

serious and permanent effects or risks can take form. Those who work daily in

polluted environments can expect higher risks of respiratory and cardiovascular

diseases, myocardial ischemia, angina, high blood pressure, and heart disease14. A

study in London found household air pollution was ranked as third most important

cause of ill health for the world’s population15.

Fine particulate matter (PM)

poses huge risks to human health.

PM has a diverse composition of

solid, liquid, and chemical

particles. The smallest particles

have higher acidity and penetrate

lungs and airways deeper16. The

most dangerous PM has an

aerodynamic diameter of 2.5μm, known by its shorthand as PM2.5, and it is not

uncommon to find higher concentrations of PM2.5 indoors than outdoors16. Exposure

to PM has been attributed to countless health effects including “increased hospital

admissions, emergency room visits, respiratory symptoms, exacerbation of chronic

respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, decreased lung function, premature

mortality… low birth weight in infants, pre-term deliveries, and fetal and infant

deaths”16, 18. PM2.5 inhalation can cause mild problems including shortness of breath,

chest discomfort, coughing, and wheezing16. Another study found a strong, consistent

correlation between adult diabetes and particulate matter air pollution that persists

Figure 5: Size comparison of nanomaterials to airborne particulate matter

BOWERS | PAGE 17

even after adjustment for other risk factors like obesity and ethnicity17. It is no

wonder why regulators are recognizing PM as a threat to health and are beginning to

enforce policy that limits its presence.

The construction of buildings is another source of indoor air pollution. Several

green building certification systems, including LEED®, WELL™, and Green Globes©

all have credit requirements specifying construction indoor air quality measures (Fig.

6). Irritants like dust, fumes, and exhausts must be regulated when conducting a

renovation on a space to avoid exposure to occupants. Several studies concluded that

construction workers who were exposed to dusts, fumes, and gases in their

occupation had a much higher risk of mortality from chronic obstructive pulmonary

disease (COPD), even after adjusting for other factors such as age and smoking

Figure 6: Example of guarded ductwork to ensure IAQ is protected during construction

BOWERS | 18

habits19, 20. This defines the importance of protecting occupants from breathing in

these pollutants.

Tobacco smoke is another significant area of IAQ worth mentioning. It is no secret

that both first and second hand smoke have serious health effects, including cancer,

lung and liver failure, and even death. In 1993 the annual direct medical care cost

from smoking alone was $50 billion22. A study found that absenteeism was

significantly higher in former and never smokers than current

smokers21.Organizations with strict no-smoking policies take a stand against the

decrease in productivity that are associated with smoking21.

WELLv2’s air category guides projects towards enhanced IAQ. Among their

preconditions (mandatory credits) is assurance of fundamental levels of air quality

thresholds for PM, gases, and radon. The program also mandates on-going monitoring

of air parameters, smoke-free conditions, effective ventilation (meeting ASHRAE

62.1-201023 or better), and mitigation of construction pollution. Aside from their

required policies, WELLv2™ encourages projects to exceed their basic standards and

enhance ventilation and filtration, design operable windows, and control other

indoor pollutants.

By following the guidelines of WELLv2™ for air quality, organizations can expect

their full-time employees are healthier, more productive, and more comfortable. A

Denmark study comparing air quality and performance confirmed productivity

significantly improved with increased ventilation rates (Fig. 7)24. Another report

BOWERS | PAGE 19

found cognitive scores were 61%-101% higher under enhanced indoor

environmental standards compared to conventional buildings25. Visitors of a WELLv2

certified space breathe in lighter and cleaner air and thus enjoy their time within the

space. Monetary benefits are difficult to calculate, however the preceding section

attempted to explain the evidence which supports the concept that enhanced IAQ can

directly benefit the occupants and owners of a space.

Figure 7 Left: Performance of text typing, addition, and proof reading as a function of the air quality (% dissatisfied with the air quality)

Right: Performance of text typing, addition, and proof-reading as a function of the ventilation rate (outdoor air supply rate)

BOWERS | 20

WATER

Water is the source of life, cleanliness, and conflict. Humans are comprised of

nearly two-thirds water26, 9; it regulates our body temperature, digests our food, and

removes toxins from the body26. Sadly, billions of people do not have access to clean

water38. There are also those lucky enough to have access to clean water but lack

proper hydration and nourishment. This is widely because of the rise of obesity,

which is associated with lower levels of hydration27, 9. Many Americans turn their

attention away from water and to the cold, refreshing taste of sugary beverages which

only dehydrates them more28. Aside from drinking, humans also require water to

clean; their bodies, hands, and homes. Nearly three billion people lack access to

proper sanitation systems38. Diseases are more easily and frequently transmitted

without proper hygiene 30, 31, 32. It is estimated that handwashing with soap could save

a million lives a year29. There are even diseases that originate from the presence of

dirty, unfiltered water, like Legionnaires’ disease. Without monitoring, stagnant,

warm water can allow waterborne pathogens to flourish in building water systems32.

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 188 was approved in 2015 meant to help design teams

install control measures to avoid hazardous conditions within the buildings’

plumbing32.

There are other concerns surrounding the topic of water. Plastic water bottles are

a growing problem. The amount of plastic bottles in the world degrading on beaches,

in oceans, and in landfills is unknowable, but it is estimated that globally, humans buy

a million plastic bottles per minute33. Reusable bottles may combat this, but only if

BOWERS | PAGE 21

they are remembered. University of Florida has partnered with

a program called Cupanion©, which offers rewards for refilling

a reusable bottle via an app on the user’s phone. The company

uses the revenue generated from the app to give clean water to

those in need39, 40.

The bathroom is another place that should be highlighted in

the topic of hydro-sustainability-crises. Toilet flushing is not

regulated in regards to gallons of water used per flush. A

building with several restrooms that use heavy flushing (3.5 gallons per flush) with

only three full time employees can waste about 12,000 gallons over a year38. The EPA

has introduced a WaterSense label for products which use a sustainable amount of

water per flush, and under the same conditions as the previous scenario, a

WaterSense product will use only 4,000 gallons per year— a 66% decrease38. After

flushing, hopefully users wash and dry their hands; and, they will likely use two or

three paper towels each time. Paper towel usage is difficult to measure, but it is

estimated that 13 billion tons of paper towel waste is sent to the landfills each year34.

The alternate to paper towels is the hot-air dryer or the jet-air dryer, but, there is a

catch— paper towels have been found to greatly surpass hand-dryers in bacteria

decontamination35. In fact, while paper towels decrease the number of all bacteria on

the hands, hot air dryers increased all types of bacteria on the hands35. WELLv2™

mandates paper towels are available in bathrooms in accordance with these findings,

however it is worth noting the sustainable debate around the topic.

Figure 8: Sustainable UF's label for the

Cupanion© program, which users scan each

time they fill to earn rewards and encourage

ecological practices

BOWERS | 22

Building owners that design following WELLv2 guidelines may help to encourage

occupants to stay hydrated, healthy, and clean by providing tested safe drinking

water, adequate restroom amenities, and promoting awareness of water quality and

management. Although difficult to calculate, there are monetary benefits to the

WELLv2™ policy. An office with deep sinks and warm running water may increase

hand washing in contrast to cold water (this is not a research-supported hypothesis,

just an amateur observation) and thus may see a decrease the number of sick days29,

30, 42. Anticipating occupant needs in design will result in the best performance.

Advancing technology and policies, like WELLv2™, will shape the future of business—

our human dependence on water, however, will never change.

NOURISHMENT

Few will disagree that diet plays a key role in health, however there is

controversy on what constitutes a “healthy diet”. Is it smaller portion sizes, zero

trans-fat, or fewer animal products and preservatives? Is it a combination? Nutrition

is a multi-dimensional concept. One thing that is certain, the obesity epidemic has a

wide ranging economic burden on society. According to Y Claire Wang et al., the

treatment costs of obesity-related preventable diseases are expected to increase by

$48-66 billion/year by 203043. Studies consistently find strong correlations between

obesity and higher rates of absenteeism; in fact, it is the number one ranking category

of productivity losses to date44 (Table 2). Another study found a nonlinear

relationship between obesity and productivity, where the extremely obese subjects

(BMI≥35) experienced significantly more adverse productivity limitations than

BOWERS | PAGE 23

mildly obese and overweight subjects (BMI 25-34.9)45. This information may

encourage organizations to implement strategies for reducing obesity, even if it’s to

modestly reduce the number of extremely obese workers.

This paper is not meant to deeply analyze the many dimensions of the obesity

crisis, but in order to make concrete suggestions for TLC to enhance their employee’s

health though design and policy, it is important to examine the recent research on the

Table 2: Economic impact of obesity, table from Hammond and Levine, 2010 44

BOWERS | 24

topic of nutrition. This includes the facets of a healthy diet, physical activity, and

environmental influences.

Reasonable portion sizes of energy-dense foods and adequate intake of fruits

and vegetables are the cornerstones of a healthy diet46, 47, 48. Higher plant-based

consumption is associated with lower risk of heart disease, stroke, high blood

pressure, diabetes, and some cancers 48, 49, 51, 51, 52, 53. Reducing the consumption of

calorie-dense foods can moderate weight, thus lowering risk for obesity-related

illnesses 47, 54. Organizational health strategies should focus on increasing fruit and

vegetable intake by and shrinking the portions of unhealthy options, like pastas,

cheesy breads, and sugary beverages. Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are often

shown to be contributing to the obesity epidemic, as they are the single largest source

of added sugar and top source of energy intake in the U.S. diet55. A simple switch from

these dangerous SSBs to a less sweetened tea (or even better, water) would greatly

control weight and prevent a number of metabolic diseases55. WELLv2™ understands

these key facets of a healthy diet, and includes this research in their policy. They also

understand the importance the environment has on an occupant’s consumption

decisions. The availability of fresh fruits and salads can greatly improve the lifestyle

choices of individuals56, 57. A study conducted on low-wage employees found

improvements in fruit and vegetable consumption, purchasing habits, and self-

efficacy after providing workplace availability of fresh fruit58. The same

environmental strategy is enforced in WELLv2™ in regards to portion sizes, SSBs, and

physical activity. There are preconditions specifying plate sizes, nutritional

BOWERS | PAGE 25

advertising and labelling, fruit and vegetable availability, and even encouraging use

of stairs 9.

Companies should encourage healthy eating practices, not only to ensure

employees have adequate nutrition, but because the benefits of doing so far outweigh

the cost.

LIGHT

Light is a primary driver of human activity. We are diurnal, which means we are

programmed to be awake in the day time and asleep in the night. Daylight stimulates

hormonal and physiological functions which animals and humans are subject to,

called the circadian rhythm59, 9. Continuing the narrative of occupant-centered design,

it is crucial for architects to synchronize lighting systems (both electric and natural)

with the circadian system. There are several studies that confirm disruption or

desynchronization of the circadian rhythm has been linked with obesity, diabetes,

depression, and metabolic disorders 9, 60-65. Inappropriate lighting design unaligned

with natural rhythms can worsen sleep and mood66. Boubekri et al.67 showed that

office workers sitting close to windows (receiving higher amounts of light during the

day than their colleagues in windowless offices), exhibited more activity overall and

slept, on average, about 46 minutes longer at night66. Lighting can have significant

effects on an occupant’s health and wellness.

BOWERS | 26

Figure 9 shows the MetLife St. Louis office which was updated by GE Lighting

experts. They performed an upgrade on their 650,000 square-foot administrative

facility and made lighting improvements in both the outdoor parking lot and the office

interior. Aside from improved visibility, the implementations made by GE resulted in

3.5 million fewer kWh and annual savings of $360,000 68. This proves that

technological innovations can have great occupational benefits such as improved

productivity and quality of life, but also can have ecological and monetary gains as

well.

WELLv2™ has credits encouraging daylight access and outdoor views. The

policy also promotes lighting design optimal for circadian rhythm and occupant

needs. Light is a significant feature of an office, thus TLC should model their

renovation according to guidelines which not only meet the needs of their employees,

but also ensure their well-being.

Figure 9 An example of an office lighting update from yellow, fluorescent T12 to a whiter, brighter T8 LED lighting. The office also

lowered the cubicle height so occupants receive more daylight, and changed the cubicle color so they’re more reflective 69.

BOWERS | PAGE 27

MOVEMENT

A majority of the developed world’s occupations do not require any vigorous

activity. Most jobs, particularly office jobs, are spent sitting at a desk slumped in front

of a computer for eight hours of the day. Physical inactivity (the quality of being

inactive according to the World Health Organization) is causing major concern in the

medical field. Obesity and its relative chronic diseases are not only attributed to

malnourishment, but also being sedentary69. Even worse, workers sitting before a

screen all day often do not have furniture catered to their comfort. Inadequate design

of offices has contributed to an increase to an array of health problems such as carpel

tunnel syndrome, cumulative trauma disorders, and repetitive strain injuries to over

200,000 Americans70. There is no reason workplace design cannot be improved to

offer relief from these ailments as well as promote physical activity.

Although this paper consistently refers to WELLv2™ as the primary guidelines for

organizational design wellness, it is worth mentioning in this section another building

certification system called Fitwel©. Fitwel© is has many bridges to WELLv2™ as it is

also aimed at occupant health and well-being, without being as rigorous and

technical. Categories include location, building access, outdoor spaces, entrances and

ground floor, stairwells, indoor environment, tenant and shared spaces, and water

supply. The reason Fitwel© is mentioned in this section of the paper (Movement) is

because nearly all the categories are aimed at the movement and activity of the

individual. WELLv2’s credits in their Movement concept nearly matches those of

Fitwel©. Both encourage organization’s to provide physical activity spaces,

BOWERS | 28

equipment, and opportunities, promote usage of stairwells, locate buildings near

quality transit stations, and allow users to store bicycles under cover. WELLv2™ goes

further by including preconditions and optimizations aimed at ergonomic education

and design. Ergonomics training has proven to be even more important than the

actual design of chairs and desks because users become aware of posture and change

their behavior accordingly71. Figure 10 shows how many times symptoms of strain

and discomfort common to computerized environments occurred amongst minimally

trained and ergonomically trained individuals71. Untrained workers experienced far

more pain than even minimally trained individuals. Clearly ergonomics is a significant

topic for occupant wellness and is necessary to include in design guidelines.

WELLv2™ remains the

primary certification

system for organizations

who wish to better the

quality of life for their

employees via enhanced

architecture and policy.

Figure 10: Total number of reported pain ratings (higher than no

pain/discomfort) across the entire study between trained and untrained groups

(Robertson et al., 2013) 71

BOWERS | PAGE 29

THERMAL COMFORT

Protection from extreme heat and cold was a significant reason we began

building structures. The invention of air conditioning made it possible for humans to

even inhabit places like Florida, where summer temperatures can easily break 100°F.

As discussed much in this paper, comfort is related to health, well-being, and

productivity—thermal comfort is no different. Temperature is ranked as one of the

highest contributing factors influencing overall human satisfaction and is closely tied

with priductivity9, 72, 73. Think about how distractingly uncomfortable it is to work in

an office that is far too hot or cold. Multiple studies showed an average of 2%

decrement in work performance per °C at 25°C (77°F) (Fig. 11). Another study

conservatively estimated that improving the thermal environment in US office

buildings would result in a direct increase in productivity of 0.5-5%, worth $12 billion

to $125 billion annually76.

Figure 11: Summary of literature review by Seppanen et al., 2004 indicating room temperature as an effect on productivity74

BOWERS | 30

The largest problem with thermal indoor environments is that it is shared

amongst all who inhabit the space, yet comfortability is subjective. Therefore, a

comfortable thermal range is difficult to achieve due to varying individual

preferences 9. There are solutions to this, like thermal zoning and use of variable

refrigerant flow (VRF) units (Figure 12). Utilizing this technology not only succeeds

in higher occupant satisfaction, but also has outstanding energy saving benefits. VRF

zoning even contributes to LEED certification77. Its energy efficiency is attributed to

its unique relay of refrigerant. Unlike conventional HVAC systems which move chilled

or heated air through long tubes of ductwork, VRF systems vary refrigerant flow

(hence the name) between indoor and outdoor units within each zone; this avoids a

potential energy loss of at least 30% 77. Some extremely intelligent systems save data

Figure 12: Office layout plan of thermal zoning using VRF units77.

BOWERS | PAGE 31

of the different zones’ preferred temperature resulting in additional savings over

time77. This is a perfect example of an advanced technological equipment with all

three facets of sustainability incorporated.

ASHRAE Standard 55 mandates thermal comfort strategies to ensure highest

occupant satisfaction. In Florida where humidity and temperatures rise well above

comfort levels, architectural

and mechanical design of air

flow is upmost importance.

When drawings are

confined to strict protocols,

such as ASHRAE Standard

55, occupants can expect to

be comfortable. The CBE

Berkeley Thermal Comfort

Tool shown in Figure 13 is extremely helpful in guiding mechanical design78. Users

may input the average level of occupant clothing, the metabolic rate (activity level),

the relative humidity, and air speed. Then the tool shows if the input complies with

ASHRAE Standard 55.

WELLv2™ includes thermal zoning and ASHRAE Standard 55 in their thermal

comfort concept area. Thus, owners who follow their guidelines can expect that their

BOWERS | 32

building is not only more efficient, but their occupants are satisfied with their thermal

environment.

SOUND

If a tree falls in a forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Well, the word “sound” itself is generally defined as the human response to

mechanical vibrations through a medium such as air9. Sound is, then, human-centric

and reliant. Hearing is an underrated sense but is extremely important to health and

well-being79. A neurobehavioral study on office workers found in open office setting,

occupants were easily influenced by noises such as background noise, closing doors,

and human activity80.

A balanced and efficient space designed empathically pays close attention to the

noises occupants will hear while performing their activities. Are they close enough to

the bathroom or mechanical room to hear toilet flushing or AC equipment? Are the

walls thick enough to hold private conversations and conference meetings? WELLv2™

considered these questions when curating their sound concept, and included credits

which limit background noise levels, ensure adequate speech privacy, and suppress

sound from HVAC equipment or restrooms. Spaces compliant with these protocols

eliminate distractions and encourage occupants to remain productive and happy

BOWERS | PAGE 33

MATERIALS

This paper has explained how closely related productivity, health, and air quality

are. However, we have yet to cover how indoor materials influence air quality. When

present, occupants can breathe in chemicals such as volatile organic compounds

(VOCs), pesticides, and dangerous cleaning products. This can not only hinder

productivity but can also have short and long-term health affects ranging from SBS

symptoms to cancer81. To understand the methods to avoiding these chemicals, it is

important to know what they are and their proven effects.

There is a long list of common VOCs, each with complicated chemical names that

really do not give any indication of its composition or effects on human health. The

important aspect of VOCs is that they are most often found in building materials such

as carpets, wall plasters, paints, and adhesives. It is no surprise, then, that personal

exposure to VOCs is made dominantly indoors than outdoors82. Key symptoms

identified by the EPA associated with exposure to VOCs include respiratory irritation,

headaches, nausea, fatigue, dizziness, damage to liver, kidney, and central nervous

system, and even cancer83. Additionally, performance is greatly influenced by the

presence of VOCs26, 85. A study in Sweden used a carpet with VOCs as the experiment

condition and found subjects typed 6.5% more slowly and reported more headaches

when the carpet was present (hidden behind a partition as to not influence test

subjects)85.

BOWERS | 34

Luckily, progressive material manufacturers are beginning to follow what is called

The Red List from The Living Future (creator of Living Building Challenge, another

rigorous green building certification system) 84. The Red List specifically names

harmful chemicals which pollute the environment and are toxic to human health and

also provides scientific evidence to support the claims84. WELLv2™ limits and

eliminates many of the chemicals found on the list and also added guidelines for

proper waste management to reduce exposure to hazardous garbage and pollution.

Further, it encourages green-cleaning protocols and integrated pest management

strategies to limit pesticide and harmful cleaning ingredient risk. These

implementations combined can greatly reduce occupant’s risk of indoor pollutant

exposure.

MIND AND COMMUNITY

Mental health and community support go together. Although genetics has a

primary role in determining someone’s mental health, psychological well-being of an

individual is directly related to the strength in services offered to him/her in their

environment86. Someone may have a substance addiction, but through rehabilitation

and strong social ties, that person may overcome their condition. Mental illness is

strongly associated with impairment in work performance and safety87, and even has

been shown to amount to $840 million in productivity losses in 2015 alone 88.

However, workplace implementations such as meditation programs and work breaks

can help increase positive mood and vigor, levels of task performance, and even

proactive behaviors such as helping others and creativity89. Increasing organizational

BOWERS | PAGE 35

health and wellness awareness is also important. According to a report “Low Health

Literacy: Implications for National Health Policy”, low health literacy costs the U.S.

between $106 billion to $238 billion annually90. Education on mental and physical

health and wellness topics in the workplace can directly combat this.

WELLv2™ includes credits that cover these issues mentioned, requiring

commitment to mental health promotion and literacy, employee access to nature, as

well as administration of occupant surveys to receive feedback regarding their health

and well-being to improve upon. Optimizations include focus, stress, sleep, and new

parent support, substance abuse education and services, and promotion of civic

engagement. There is also an optimization for organizational transparency, which

promotes disclosure of equitable and inclusive business practices through programs

like JUST. Certification (which TLC has already earned). Employees that work for a

company that is WELLv2™ certified know that they have the benefit of working in an

organization that operates on behalf of them and does all they can to ensure their

health and well-being.

COST-BENEFIT CONCLUSION

This cost-benefit analysis has touched on every facet of a building that influences the

health and well-being of occupants, including the physical and non-tangible aspects.

From enhanced indoor air quality, to corporate support of individual mentality and

communities, owners have the ability to make intentional design decisions so their

buildings serve on behalf of their occupants. The green building movement is a

BOWERS | 36

revolution of the way we build places we live, work, and play. Buildings consume

nearly 40% of all energy produced globally1, but certified green buildings can capture

energy savings and reduce emissions, while also having major health co-benefits, as

this paper has shown91. Technology has always been the tools of humankind meant

to make our lives healthier, easier, and happier. By focusing on the occupant’s needs,

buildings may start keeping us and our planet more viable. Green buildings are the

future of architecture, and certification systems like WELLv2™ act as leading

technologies helping to guide the process of transition.

BOWERS | PAGE 37

TLC ENGINEERING FOR ARCHITECTURE AND WELLv2 | FINAL SUMMARY

I had the opportunity to intern with TLC Engineering for Architecture

alongside their sustainability team. To describe why I completed this project on

behalf of the organization, I offer a summary of TLC history.

TLC Engineering for Architecture began when John Tilden and Earl J Wolpert

joined a partnership named Wolpert Tilden & Associates. Ed Lobnitz became

a draftsman after leaving the University of Florida, then shortly he originated

the co-op program at UF so he could work and finish his degree

simultaneously. He joined Wolpert Tilden & Associates, and it was not long

until they were serving nearly all the architects in central Florida. Ed Lobnitz

became CEO and formed a subsidiary company called CADSI, Computer Aided

Design Software Inc. (very similar to the modern 3D design software CAD). In

1981, a mechanical engineer, Travis Cooper, joined Lobnitz and Tilden and

renamed the company Tilden Lobnitz & Cooper (TLC). They started a

healthcare engineering consulting firm, Medical Facilities Consultants (MFC),

and continued this initiative after MFC disbanded. Fast forward to 2010 and

TLC has a new CEO, a new vision, and just made the AIA 2030 Commitment to

carbon neutral buildings by 2030. TLC also engineered the 1st LEED Certified

Building in Florida, Lynn Business Center. In 2018, TLC has grown to about

400 employees and have worked on a multitude of projects with a number of

disciplines offered. TLC earned their JUST Certification one year ago and has

helped certify 400 LEED projects. (92)

BOWERS | 38

TLC has traditionally adopted advancing technology and shown their

commitment to sustainability. After accomplishing over 400 LEED certified projects,

certifying their 39,000 square ft HQ office under the most rigorous, healthful, and

technical green building rating systems would be a huge step forward for the

company. It would not only tell potential clients that they have the capabilities to

perform such a challenging task, giving them a leg up in the volatile market of

sustainable architecture; but also would support their corporate mission, which is to

be a leader in creating sustainable environments as the trusted engineering advisor

to all stakeholders.

I think it is remarkable that I had the chance to work there, to advance both

my and their sustainable path, and to be able to bring the company full circle at UF

when one of the founders, Ed Lobnitz, began his engineering career there. TLC has

about 400 employees and covers anywhere from 65-100% of health costs. With this

in mind, investment in implementing the best design practice for enhanced healthy

work environments would benefit their own employees, save on health and energy

costs, and further their mission.

BOWERS | PAGE 39

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

1. U.S. Energy Administration, 2012. Architecture 2030. 2030 Inc.

2. International Code Council, 2011. IECC 2012. 2012 International Energy

Conservation Code pp. 1-158.

3. Florida Building Code, 2017. Florida Building Code Fifth Edition Energy

Conservation. Florida Building Code 2017 pp. 1-130.

4. ASHRAE, 2016. ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 Energy Standard for

Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings (IEP Edition). ASHRAE

STANDARD 2014 pp. 1-185.

5. United States Green Building Council, 2013. LEED v.4. LEED v.4 Reference

Guide for Building Design and Construction, pp. 4-8.

6. Yousef Al Horr et al. 2017. Occupant productivity and indoor environment

quality: A case of GSAS. International Journal of Sustainable Built

Environment (6) 476-490.

7. Cabe, 2005. The Impact of Office Design on Business Performance.

Commission for Architecture & Built Environment and the British Council for

Offices, London. 43-55.

8. WELL™

9. WELLv2™

10. Klepeis N, Nelson W, Ott W, et al. The National Human Activity Pattern

Survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessing exposure to environmental

pollutants. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol. 2001;11(3):231-252.

BOWERS | 40

11. Ann Brown. 2014 EPA https://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/04/how-many-

breaths-do-you-take-each-day/ [accessed June 2018]

12. A. Norhidayaha et al. 2013. Indoor Air Quality and Sick Building Syndrome in

Three Selected Buildings (53) 93-98.

13. Ki-Hyun Kim et al. 2013. A review on human health perspective of air

pollution with respect to allergies and asthma. Environmental International

Journal (59) 41-52.

14. Brook RD, Franklin B, Cascio W, et al. 2004. Air Pollution and Cardiovascular

Disease. Circulation. (21).

15. Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of

disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21

regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease

Study 2010. 2012. Lancet 380(9859):2224-2260.

16. Ki-Hyun Kim, Ehsanul Kabir, Shamin Kabir. 2015. A review on the human

health impact of airborne particulate matter. Environment International

Journal (74) 136-143.

17. Pearson JF, Bachireddy C, Shyamprasad S, Goldfine AB, Brownstein JS. 2010.

Association between fine particulate matter and diabetes prevalence in the

U.S. Diabetes Care;33(10):2196.

18. Environmental Health Indicators New Zealand. About the indoor environment

and health. Massey University. http://www.ehinz.ac.nz/indicators/indoor-

environment/about-the-indoor-environment-and-health/ [accessed June 2018]

BOWERS | PAGE 41

19. Yingshi Song et al. 2016. The spatial-temporal characteristics and health

impacts of ambient fine particulate matter in China. Journal of Cleaner

Production (112) 1312-1318.

20. Bergdahl, K. et al. 2004. Increased mortality in COPD among construction

workers exposed to inorganic dust. European respiratory Journal (23) 402-

406.

21. Kjell Torén, et al. 2014. Effect of Occupational Exposure to Vapors, Gases,

Dusts, and Fumes on COPD Mortality Risk Among Swedish Construction

Workers A Longitudinal Cohort Study CHEST (5) 992-997.

22. Halpern Michael T, et al. 2001. Impact of smoking status on workplace

absenteeism and productivity Tobacco Control (10) 233-238.

23. US Department of Health and Human Services. 1993. Medical care

expenditures attributable to cigarette smoking—United States,. MMWR Morb

Mortal Wkly Rep 1994;43:469–72.

24. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010. Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air

Quality.;2010.

25. Wargocki et al. 2000. The Effects of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) On Performance,

Behaviour and Productivity (1) 635-641.

26. Allen Joseph et al. 2016. Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with

Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in

BOWERS | 42

Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional

Office Environments. Environmental Health Perspectives (124.6) 805-813.

27. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. 2005. Dietary Reference

Intakes for Water, Potassium, Sodium, Chloride, and Sulfate. Washington: The

National Academies Press

28. Chang T, Ravi N. 2016. Inadequate Hydration, BMI, and Obesity Among US

Adults: NHANES 2009-2012. Ann Fam Med. 320-324.

29. Onufrak SJ, Park S, Sharkey JR. 2015. The Relationship of Perceptions of Tap

Water Safety with Intake of Sugar Sweetened Beverages and Plain Water

among U.S. Adults. Public Heal Nutr 17(1):179-185.

30. Val Curtis and Sandy Cairncross 2003. Effect of washing hands with soap on

diarrhea risk in the community: a systematic review The Lancet (3) 275-282.

31. Zivich Paul et al. 2018. Effect of hand hygiene on infectious diseases in the

office workplace: A systematic review. American Journal of Infection Control

(46) 448-455.

32. Vanderslice James et al. 1993. All Coliforms Are Not Created Equal. A

Comparison of the Effects of Water Source and in-House Water

Contamination on Infantile Diarrheal Disease. Water Resources Research (7)

1983-1995.

33. ASHRAE STANDARD 188

34. The Guardian 2017. A million bottles a minute: world’s plastic binge ‘as

dangerous as climate change

BOWERS | PAGE 43

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/28/a-million-a-

minute-worlds-plastic-bottle-binge-as-dangerous-as-climate-change

35. Environmental Impact 2016. PeopleTowels

https://www.peopletowels.com/wage-war-on-waste-1 [accessed July 2018]

36. Cunrui Huang et al. 2012. The Hygienic Efficacy of Different Hand-Drying

Methods: A Review of the Evidence, Mayo Foundation for Medical Education

and Research (8) 791-798.

37. Redway K, Fawdar S. 2008. European Tissue Symposium: A Comparative

Study of Three Different Hand Drying Methods: Paper Towel, Warm Air

Dryer, Jet Air Dryer.

38. LEED Indoor Water Use Calculator

39. Peter H. Gleick 1998. The human right to water. Water Policy (1) 487-503.

40. Cupanion 2018. http://cupanion.com/about/

41. http://sustainable.ufl.edu/get-involved/for-students/cupanion/ [accessed

July 2018]

42. Robert W. Kenefick, PhD, and Michael N. Sawka, PhD. 2007. Hydration at the

Work Site. Journal of the American College of Nutrition (26) 597-603.

43. Y Claire Wang, et al. 2011. Health and economic burden of the projected

obesity trends in the USA and the UK. The Lancet (378) 815-826.

44. Ross A Hammond, Ruth Levine 2010. The economic impact of obesity in the

United States. Diabetes , Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and

Therapy (3) 285-295.

BOWERS | 44

45. Gates Donna, et al. 2008. Obesity and Presenteeism: The Impact of Body Mass

Index on Workplace Productivity JOEM (50.1) 39-46.

46. Lock Karen et al. 2005. The global burden of disease attributable to low

consumption of fruit and vegetables: implications for the global strategy on

diet. Bulletin of the World Health Organization (83) 100-108.

47. Ledlkwe Jenny et al. 2005. Portion Sizes and the Obesity Epidemic. American

Society for Nutritional Sciences 905-910.

48. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC Guide to Strategies to

Increase the Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables.; 2011.

49. Hu B Frank 2003. Plant-based foods and prevention of cardiovascular

disease: an overview. Am J Clin Nutr 78 (3) 544-551.

50. He FJ, Nowson CA, MacGregor GA 2006. Fruit and vegetable consumption

and stroke: meta-analysis of cohort studies. Lancet 367(9507):320-326.

51. Fung Tet al. 2008. Adherence to a DASHstyle diet and risk of coronary heart

disease and stroke in women. Arch Intern Med.;168(7):713-720.

52. Montonen J et al. 2004Dietary antioxidant intake and risk of type 2 diabetes.

Diabetes Care 27(2):362-366.

53. World Cancer Research Fund, American Institute for Cancer Research. 2007

Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer: a global

perspective. Washington (DC): American Institute for Cancer Research

54. Lisa R. Young and Nestle Marion 2002. The Contribution of Expanding

Portion Sizes to the US Obesity Epidemic. Am J Public Health 92 (2): 246-249.

BOWERS | PAGE 45

55. F. B. Hu 2013. Resolved: there is sufficient scientific evidence that decreasing

sugar-sweetened beverage consumption will reduce the prevalence of

obesity and obesity-related diseases. Obesity Reviews 14 (8) 606-619.

56. Schwartz, Marlene B 2017. Appetite Self-Regulation: Environmental and

Policy Influences on Eating Behaviors. Obesity S26-S38.

57. van Kleef, Ellen 2012. Healthy snacks at the checkout counter: A lab and field

study on the impact of shelf arrangement and assortment structure on

consumer choices BMC Public Health 12: 1072.

58. Backman D 2011. Effect of fresh fruit availability at worksites on the fruit and

vegetable consumption of low-wage employees. J Nutr Educ Behav 43 (7)

113-121.

59. Czeisler CA, Gooley JJ 2007. Sleep and Circadian Rhythms in Humans. Cold

Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 72:579-597

60. Y Cho et al. 2015. Effects of artificial light at night on human health: A

literature review of observational and experimental studies applied to

exposure assessment. Chronobiol Int. 32(9):1294-1310.

61. Challet E and Kalsbeek A 2017. Circadian Rhythms and Metabolism front

Endocrinology (8) 201

62. Plano SA et al. 2017. Circadian and Metabolic Effects of Light: Implications in

Weight Homeostasis and Health. Front Neurol. 8:558.

63. Fonken LK, Nelson RJ 2014. The effects of light at night on circadian clocks

and metabolism. Endocr Rev.;35(4):648-670.

BOWERS | 46

64. Boyce P, Barriball E 2010. Circadian rhythms and depression. Aust Fam

Physician.;39(5):307-310.

65. Germain A, Kupfer DJ. Circadian rhythm disturbances in depression. Hum

Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(7):571-585. doi:10.1002/hup.964.

66. Figueiro Mariana G. et al. 2017. The impact of daytime light exposures on

sleep and mood in office workers. Sleep Health (3) 204-215.

67. Boubekri M, et al. 2014. Impact of windows and daylight exposure on overall

health and sleep quality of office workers: a case-control pilot study. J Clin

Sleep Med.10(6):603–611.

68. Outdoor & Office Lighting GE Lighting 2013.

http://emea.gelighting.com/LightingWeb/emea/projects/metlife.jsp

69. Facts about Physical Activity CDC

https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/data/facts.htm

70. Attaran, Mohsen and Brian D. Wargo 1999. Succeeding with ergonomics in

computerized offices. Work Study (48) 3:92-99.

71. Robertson, Michelle M., Vincent M. Ciriello, and Angela M. Garabet 2013.

Office ergonomics training and a sit-stand workstation: Effects on

musculoskeletal and visual symptoms and performance of office workers.

Appl Ergon (1) 73-85.

72. Zhang A. Human thermal sensation and comfort in transient and non-

uniform thermal environments. September 2003.

BOWERS | PAGE 47

73. Frontczak MWP 2011. Literature survey on how different factors influence

human comfort in indoor environments. Build Environ. 46(4):922-937.

74. Seppanen, Olli William, J. Fisk, and David Faulkner 2004. Control of

Temperature for Health and Productivity in Offices. Ernest Orlando Berkley

Nat. Laboratory.

75. Wargocki, Pawel et al. 2000. The Effects Of Outdoor Air Supply Rate In An

Office On Perceived Air Quality, Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) Symptoms and

Productivity Indoor Air (4) 222-236.

76. J.W. Fisk, A.H. Rosenfeld, Estimates of improved productivity and health from

better indoor environments, Indoor Air 7 (1997) 158–172.

77. Androff, Pamela 2013. CRF Zoning Energy-efficiency Data: Five Questions

specifiers should ask https://www.constructionspecifier.com/vrf-zoning-

energy-efficiency-data-five-questions-specifiers-should-ask/ (Date accessed:

July 2018)

78. CBE Thermal Comfort Tool http://comfort.cbe.berkeley.edu/

79. Hänninen O, Knol AB, and Jantunen M, et al. 2014. Environmental Burden of

Disease in Europe: Assessing Nine Risk Factors in Six Countries. Environ

Health Perspect. 122(5):439-446.

80. CM Mak et al. 2011. The effect of sound on office productivity. Building

Services Engineering Research and Technology

BOWERS | 48

81. Jian Zhou et al. 2010. Health risk assessment of personal inhalation exposure

to volatile organic compounds in Tianjin, China. Science of the Total

Environment 452-459

82. Wallace LA et al. 2001. Human exposure to volatile organic pollutants:

implications for indoor air studies. Annu Rev Energy Environ; V26:269–301.

83. EPA. Indoor Air Quality https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-

iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoor-air-quality#Health_Effects

84. International Living Future Institute, The Red List https://living-

future.org/declare/declare-about/red-list/

85. Wyon, David P. The Effects Of Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) On Performance,

Behaviour And Productivity. International Centre for Indoor Environment

and Energy.

86. World Health Organization 2018. Mental health: strengthening our response

http://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-

strengthening-our-response

87. C. Haslam et al. 2005. Anxiety and depression in the workplace: Effects on the

individual and organisation (a focus group investigation). J Affect Disord. (2)

209-215.

88. Uribe JM et al. 2017. Presenteeism, Absenteeism, and Lost Work Productivity

among Depressive Patients from Five Cities of Colombia. Value Health Reg

Issues. 14: 15-19.

BOWERS | PAGE 49

89. Fritz, Charlotte et al. 2013. Embracing work breaks: Recovering from work

stress. Organizational Dynamics 42, 274-280.

90. Vernon, John A. et al. 2007. Low Health Literacy: Implications for National

Health. Organizational Dynamics 42, 274-280.

91. MacNaughton Cao X. Buonocore J Cedeno-Laurent J. Spengler J. Bernstein A.

Allen J. 2018. Energy savings, emission reductions, and health co-benefits of

the green building movement. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol (4) 307-318.

92. TLC Engineering for Architecture. TLC History 2018

http://www.tlc-engineers.com/about/pages/tlc-history.aspx (Date accessed

August 2018)