bents opera house - analysis

Bent’s Opera House - Analysis ReportCreated by: SharkitectsJames Reynolds and Larissa Reyna

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

Bent’s Opera Analysis Report by: Sharkitects.

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


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

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

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

Building Overview


Circulation Patterns

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

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


Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Erie Canal

Circulation Patterns

Erie Canal

Scored 73 out of 100 in walkscore.com, Medina is classified as a very walkable city were most errands can be accomplished by foot. The diversity found in its core of shops, churches, restaurants and culture along a 1/4 mile radius makes it classify as walkable, even though the streets cape its planned around cars and not pedestrians.

Erie Canal


Climate Analysis

Predominant winds come from the Southwest at 20 km/hr. With a relative humidity of 80-95% humid.An average temperature of 20 degrees Celsius.And 280 mm of rain.

Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

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


Climate Analysis

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

Predominant winds come from the West at 35 km/hr. With a relative humidity of 80-95% humid.An average temperature of 0 degrees Celsius.And 280 mm of rain.



Climate Analysis

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

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

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

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


Summer Solar Access Analysis


Climate Analysis

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

The existing building Northern and West facade are always under shadow.The Southern facade receives sun on the third and second floor all the time while the East facade receives some sun in the mornings.

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

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


Winter Solar Access Analysis


Building Existing Conditions

The compartmentalization of the building in the basement, first and second floor is evident, preventing light to access the Northern bays. The basement receives no natural light as it is completely enclosed, the first floor receives natural light in 63% of the surface, 58% of the surface on the second floor is natural lit, while the third floor gets the higher percentage of 79%. Basement floors are not required to be calculated for LEED purposes. The building average surface lit is 66%. LEED v3 (2009) requires 75% of the floor surface to be covered in natural light with levels above the 300 lux. As on a 9% increment in natural lit surface must be achieved in order to obtain this credit.

Diagram Data extracted from the Revit 2015 Daylight Analysis.

Daylight Analysis LEED 2009 - 9am to 3pm September


MEZZANINETHIRDSECONDFIRSTBASEMENT

LIGHT MEASUREMENTSAll numbers in LUX

803

15

140

103

1400

175 115

1271200

150

441

37232

22481999

1200 9

180

13001100

1300850

330

64

200

102

112270 6

465 14

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

1555 240 3


61 59.5

59.861

60

61.561.5

62.561.5 59

59

60

59

60 60

5758.8

58.5

57.5

59

58

61.56377

60.5 6060

60 5959.8

62

54

83.557.5

56.5

57

56595961

5862.5

70

61.558

585960 57

5960

58 53

63 6260 58 57

55

60

55

57

TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTSAll numbers in °F

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

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

Basement: presents no signal of light since it is completely enclosed.First: in general low quality of light. High numbers are perceived near glassed areas.Second: bay on the left presents high amount of lighting while the central and right bay needs improvement. (Working area avg lux requirements = 400 LUX)Third: well lit in 80% of the space, levels decrease as non-glassed areas are approached.Mezzanine: low quality of light, average below 100 LUX.

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



803

15

140

103

1400

175 115

1271200

150

441

37232

22481999

1200 9

180

13001100

1300850

330

64

200

102

112270 6

465 14

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

1555 240 3



803

15

140

103

1400

175 115

1271200

150

441

37232

22481999

1200 9

180

13001100

1300850

330

64

200

102

112270 6

465 14

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

1555 240 3

Building Existing Conditions


Climate Analysis

Summer times in Rochester are most of the time inside the comfort zone.Though as seen in this chart, Humidity level reaches 20% and temperatures rises up to 35 degrees Celsius.According to this chart the most effective technique to achieve comfort levels is natural ventilation. Data extracted from the Ecotect Weather Tool.

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


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

Winter’s temperature average is -1.5 degrees Celsius with high levels of relative humidity, placing this weather outside the comfort zone 100% of the time.Several techniques could be implemented to move this placement near the comfort zone, such as exposed mass and night purge, and thermal mass, but the most effective would be solar passive heating if aided with super insulation.

Climate Analysis


Action Plan / Design Goals

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

Improve the building’s envelope performance.

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

Improve Daylight levels inside building.

Adding a new set of windows on the third floor Northern facade.Creating a opening in the Southern facade.

Improve Connectivity withing the bays.

Creating openings in the existing bearing walls

Improve Air Quality and Spaces Connectivity.

Utilizing this new void space to allow a sharing of air volume between floors as well as views of the programming between floors.Note: The punching of floor and walls represent a 9% of the building’s floor and wall surface.

91% OF EXISTING CORE AND SHELL REMAIN

COMPARTMENTALIZED

16% LVL2 FLOOR REMOVAL25% LVL1 FLOOR REMOVAL

10% FACADE REMOVAL40% BAY 1 WALL REMOVAL10% BAY2 WALL REMOVAL

South Facade

BAY1

BAY2


LEED Energy and Atmosphere

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

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

Prerequisite #1. Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems.

This credit’s goal is to ensure that every energy relates system is well thought ahead and implemented in the most effective way possible.As an intensive analysis of existing conditions and lighting, heating/cooling, energy generation options was executed and some implemented in the final design this requisite is being assumed as Accomplished.

Prerequisite #2. Minimum Energy Performance.

This credit’s goal is to establish a minimum level of energy efficiency, to reduce costs and environmental impact. It requires to demonstrate 10 or 5% improvement from the base model.This project presents percentages larger than 10% therefore this calculation will be shown later in this document.

Prerequisite #3. Fundamental Refrigerant Management.

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


LEED Energy and Atmosphere

Credit #1. Optimize Energy Performance.

The projects present a 80% of improvement in energy performance, this will be proved in the energy analysis section of this report.Taking advantage of the heat loss generated by the microbrewery counts as self supplied energy that reduces environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use. At the temperature of 75 Celsius, an approximate of 130,000 kWh of heat is lost per week during the brewing process of a small brewery. This heat will be recollected and utilized to heat the volume of air in the building, an average reduction of 8% energy required to heat the space during the months of October to May (70% of the year) is achieved by doing this.The implementation of the PARANS systems utilizes the sun to naturally illuminate 50% of the interior space, where openings to let natural light in were impossible to achieve. The resulting is a building with 0% of artificial lighting during the day, a 40% reduction in the lighting energy consumption .

Credit #2. On-Site Renewable Energy.

No energy is produced on-site.

Credit #3. Enhanced Commissioning.

The commissioning process is assumed to have started early for this project utilizing the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction, 2009 edition. Anthony Engineering Services is the entity in charge of this credit.

Credit #4. Enhanced Refrigerant Management.

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

Credit #5. Measurement and Verification.

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

Credit #6. Green Power.

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


LEED Score Card

LEED

200

9 fo

r N

ew C

onst

ruct

ion

and

Maj

or R

enov

atio

nsPr

ojec

t N

ame

Pro

ject

Che

cklis

tD

ate

18Po

ssib

le P

oint

s:

26Y

?N

Y?

N

YPr

ereq

1

2Cr

edit

41

to 2

1Cr

edit

1

11

Cred

it 5

1 to

25

Cred

it 2

5

1Cr

edit

6Ra

pidl

y Re

new

able

Mat

eria

ls1

xCr

edit

3Br

ownf

ield

Red

evel

opm

ent

11

Cred

it 7

16

Cred

it 4

.16

1Cr

edit

4.2

114

Poss

ible

Poi

nts:

15

xCr

edit

4.3

Alte

rnat

ive

Tran

spor

tati

on—

Low

-Em

itti

ng a

nd F

uel-

Effi

cien

t Ve

hicl

es3

1Cr

edit

4.4

2Y

Prer

eq 1

1Cr

edit

5.1

Site

Dev

elop

men

t—Pr

otec

t or

Res

tore

Hab

itat

1Y

Prer

eq 2

xCr

edit

5.2

Site

Dev

elop

men

t—M

axim

ize

Ope

n Sp

ace

11

Cred

it 1

1

xCr

edit

6.1

Stor

mw

ater

Des

ign—

Qua

ntit

y Co

ntro

l1

1Cr

edit

2

1x

Cred

it 6

.2St

orm

wat

er D

esig

n—Q

ualit

y Co

ntro

l1

1Cr

edit

3.1

11

Cred

it 7

.1H

eat

Isla

nd E

ffec

t—N

on-r

oof

11

Cred

it 3

.21

1Cr

edit

7.2

11

Cred

it 4

.11

1Cr

edit

8Li

ght

Pollu

tion

Red

ucti

on1

1Cr

edit

4.2

1x

Cred

it 4

.31

3Po

ssib

le P

oint

s:

101

Cred

it 4

.41

1Cr

edit

5

1Y

Prer

eq 1

1Cr

edit

6.1

Cont

rolla

bilit

y of

Sys

tem

s—Li

ghti

ng1

xCr

edit

1W

ater

Eff

icie

nt L

ands

capi

ng2

to 4

1Cr

edit

6.2

1x

Cred

it 2

Inno

vati

ve W

aste

wat

er T

echn

olog

ies

21

Cred

it 7

.11

3Cr

edit

32

to 4

1Cr

edit

7.2

Ther

mal

Com

fort

—Ve

rifi

cati

on1

1Cr

edit

8.1

126

Poss

ible

Poi

nts:

35

1Cr

edit

8.2

1

YPr

ereq

1

6Po

ssib

le P

oint

s:

6Y

Prer

eq 2

YPr

ereq

3

1Cr

edit

1.1

119

Cred

it 1

1 to

19

1Cr

edit

1.2

1x

Cred

it 2

1 to

71

Cred

it 1

.31

2Cr

edit

32

1Cr

edit

1.4

12

Cred

it 4

21

Cred

it 1

.51

2Cr

edit

53

1Cr

edit

2

11

Cred

it 6

23

Poss

ible

Poi

nts:

4

10Po

ssib

le P

oint

s:

141

Cred

it 1

.11

YPr

ereq

1

1Cr

edit

1.2

11

Cred

it 1

.11

to 3

1Cr

edit

1.3

11

Cred

it 1

.2Bu

ildin

g Re

use—

Mai

ntai

n 50

% of

Inte

rior

Non

-Str

uctu

ral E

lem

ents

1Cr

edit

1.4

12

Cred

it 2

1 to

21

Cred

it 3

1 to

280

Poss

ible

Poi

nts:

11

0

Regi

onal

Pri

orit

y: S

peci

fic

Cred

itRe

gion

al P

rior

ity:

Spe

cifi

c Cr

edit

Regi

onal

Pri

orit

y: S

peci

fic

Cred

itRe

gion

al P

rior

ity:

Spe

cifi

c Cr

edit

Mea

sure

men

t an

d Ve

rifi

cati

on

Inno

vati

on in

Des

ign:

Spe

cifi

c Ti

tle

Inno

vati

on in

Des

ign:

Spe

cifi

c Ti

tle

Inno

vati

on in

Des

ign:

Spe

cifi

c Ti

tle

Inno

vati

on in

Des

ign:

Spe

cifi

c Ti

tle

Inno

vati

on in

Des

ign:

Spe

cifi

c Ti

tle

Mat

eria

ls R

euse

Stor

age

and

Colle

ctio

n of

Rec

ycla

bles

Mat

eria

ls a

nd R

esou

rces

Fund

amen

tal C

omm

issi

onin

g of

Bui

ldin

g En

ergy

Sys

tem

s

Tota

lCo

nstr

ucti

on W

aste

Man

agem

ent

Enha

nced

Com

mis

sion

ing

On-

Site

Ren

ewab

le E

nerg

y

Enha

nced

Ref

rige

rant

Man

agem

ent

Cons

truc

tion

IAQ

Man

agem

ent

Plan

—Be

fore

Occ

upan

cy

Mat

eria

ls a

nd R

esou

rces

, Co

ntin

ued

Wat

er E

ffic

ienc

y

Build

ing

Reus

e—M

aint

ain

Exis

ting

Wal

ls,

Floo

rs,

and

Roof

Alte

rnat

ive

Tran

spor

tati

on—

Park

ing

Capa

city

Hea

t Is

land

Eff

ect—

Roof

Recy

cled

Con

tent

Regi

onal

Mat

eria

ls

Cert

ifie

d W

ood

Alte

rnat

ive

Tran

spor

tati

on—

Bicy

cle

Stor

age

and

Chan

ging

Roo

ms

Sust

aina

ble

Site

s

Alte

rnat

ive

Tran

spor

tati

on—

Publ

ic T

rans

port

atio

n Ac

cess

Site

Sel

ecti

onD

evel

opm

ent

Den

sity

and

Com

mun

ity

Conn

ecti

vity

Cons

truc

tion

Act

ivit

y Po

lluti

on P

reve

ntio

n

Low

-Em

itti

ng M

ater

ials

—Ad

hesi

ves

and

Seal

ants

Low

-Em

itti

ng M

ater

ials

—Pa

ints

and

Coa

ting

s

Opt

imiz

e En

ergy

Per

form

ance

Ener

gy a

nd A

tmos

pher

e

Wat

er U

se R

educ

tion

—20

% Re

duct

ion

Low

-Em

itti

ng M

ater

ials

—Co

mpo

site

Woo

d an

d Ag

rifi

ber

Prod

ucts

Low

-Em

itti

ng M

ater

ials

—Fl

oori

ng S

yste

ms

Indo

or C

hem

ical

and

Pol

luta

nt S

ourc

e Co

ntro

l

Ther

mal

Com

fort

—D

esig

nCo

ntro

llabi

lity

of S

yste

ms—

Ther

mal

Com

fort

Gre

en P

ower

Wat

er U

se R

educ

tion

Min

imum

Ene

rgy

Perf

orm

ance

Fund

amen

tal R

efri

gera

nt M

anag

emen

t

Day

light

and

Vie

ws—

View

s

LEED

Acc

redi

ted

Prof

essi

onal

Day

light

and

Vie

ws—

Day

light

Cert

ifie

d 40

to

49 p

oint

s

Silv

er 5

0 to

59

poin

ts

Gol

d 60

to

79 p

oint

s

Pla

tinu

m 8

0 to

110

Cons

truc

tion

IAQ

Man

agem

ent

Plan

—D

urin

g Co

nstr

ucti

on

Out

door

Air

Del

iver

y M

onit

orin

g

Indo

or E

nvir

onm

enta

l Qua

lity

Min

imum

Indo

or A

ir Q

ualit

y Pe

rfor

man

ceEn

viro

nmen

tal T

obac

co S

mok

e (E

TS)

Cont

rol

Incr

ease

d Ve

ntila

tion

Regi

onal

Pri

orit

y Cr

edit

s

Inno

vati

on a

nd D

esig

n Pr

oces

s


The increase of insulation in this buildining benefits the envelope by increasing the efficiency of the HVAC system at the tradeoff of higher upfront construction costs.

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

A quick calculation will provide information on the economic impact of chosing this solution:

52,4550(total sf) / 32(sf per zip panel) = 1,640 Panels 1,640 X $12 (bulk cost per panel) = $21,300 1,640 X $10 (Installation per panel) = $16,400 Total Cost = $40,000

The projected annual savings on HVAC use in the improved envelope totals $14,000, giving a ROI of only 2.25 years

Envelope Improvement - Insulation

ZIP Panels system.

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

DETAIL SECTION ASCALE: 1/4” = 1’


Daylight Improvement - Analysis

Basement 5294 SF 0 0% 736 SF 13% 1300 SF 25%

Level1 4529 SF 3399 63% 2870 SF 63% 3500 SF 77%

Level 2 5292 SF 4306 59% 2900 SF 55% 3950 SF 75%

Level 3 5460 SF 4749 78% 4400 SF 80% N/A 80%

Lighting Analysis Floor Schedule including PARANS systems.

Floor Area Included in DaylightingName

Openings with PARANS

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

Existing

Existing Building Conditions.

Walls and Floor Openings.

PARANS system.


Daylight Improvement - Analysis

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

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

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

SECTION BSCALE: 3/16” = 1’- 0”

PARANS SP3 SOLAR RECEIVER:L ight input to f iberoptic cables

FIBEROPTIC CABLES:Embedded withinnew inter ior wal l


Daylight Improvement - PARANS

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

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

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

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

DETAIL SECTION BSCALE: 3/4” = 1’

PARANS SOLAR L1 FIXTUREHybrid Natural L ight - LED

Difussed L ightOutput 510 LM

FIBER OPTIC CABLESFiber Optic Cables br ing Natural l ight Ins ide.

PARANS SOLAR SPOTLIGHTHybrid Naural L ight - LED

Direct L ightOutput 510 LM


Energy Savings

In order to prove the efficiency of the design an energy simulation was run utilizing Revit and Green Building Studio software. This analysis compares the energy efficiency of existing building conditions and the new proposed conditions. Some assumptions regarding the electricity’s wage and the usage of a regular duct HVAC system were assumed by the software.

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

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


Energy Savings

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


Conclusion

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

bents opera house - analysis

Documents

bents opera hall

important building

historic building

city of medina

story sandstone building

februarypredominant

walkable city

niagara wine trail