1. Green Dorm

2. WATER SYSTEMS TEAMSPACE SYSTEMS TEAM Ryan W. Ryan S. Nick Jack JamesStephanie Eric

3. Green Dorm BRIEF HISTORY

4. Green Dorm CURRENT STATE NARRATIVE - Water Current State Narrative ?

5. Green Dorm PROJECT FOCUS

6. Green Dorm PROJECT FOCUS Systems Scopes: Site Structure Skin Waste Mechanical Space water

7. Green Dorm PROJECT FOCUS Systems Scopes: Site Structure Skin Waste Mechanical Space water

8. Green Dorm WATER SYSTEM Teams Gatekeepers Stakeholders Designers Decision Makers Board of TrusteesProvostPresident Engineers Occupational Health & Safety City & County Building Inspectors ADA Compliance Auditors Craig Criddle (greywater & blackwater remediation)Richard Luthy (persistant pollutants in water)Sandy Robertson (water reuse)Alexandria Bohem (water treatment)John Haymaker (Decision Systems) Sherwood Design Engineers (Civil Works) Taylor Engineering (Mechanical Engineering) School of Engineering Research Teams Future Residents Surrounding Community Campus Planning & Design Architects (EHDD)

9. Green Dorm WATER SYSTEM Goals Economic Sustainability Most Desirable Housing Environmental Performance Living Lab Minimize Liability Minimize Lifecycle Costs Minimize First Cost Minimize Offsite Inputs & Outputs (nearly closed loop/off grid)Minimize Stormwater Runoff & Impervious FootprintUtilize Blackwater & Greywater Treatment & RecyclingMaximize Water Conservation MeasuresMaximize Onsite Water Harvesting Capacity Living Lab Activities Enhance/Do Not Disturb Residents Water systems function without reducing the quality of service. Reduced Water Use Popular Row House Optimize Material Resources Provides for Monitoring & Testing of System EffectivenessAdaptable Construction to Accept New Systems & Projects Maximize Comfort Sustainability Research Facility Residential Education Case Study For Coursework Zero Carbon Building

10. Green Dorm METRICS Lifecycle Cost of combined water systems Measured against baseline green Percent reduction in utility water consumption Measured against baseline green Self Sufficient Systems 3 GOALS + 3 METRICS

11. Green Dorm METRICS 30 % cost reduction20% cost reduction10% cost reductionBaseline Green20% cost increase10% cost increase30% cost increase+ 3+ 2+ 1 0- 2- 1- 3 Lifecycle cost of combined water systems (measured against baseline green)

12. Green Dorm METRICS 100 % reduction80% reduction60% reduction50% Reduction20% reduction30% reductionno reduction+ 3+ 2+ 1 0- 2- 1- 3 Percent reduction in utility water consumption (measured against baseline green)

13. Green Dorm METRICS Self Sufficient System 100 % time water available from on-site sources80% time water available from on-site sources60% time water available from on-site sources50% time water available from on-site sources20% time water available from on-site sources30% time water available from on-site sources10% time water available from on-site sources+ 3+ 2+ 1 0- 2- 1- 3

14. Green Dorm Future State Narrative Space Cover/Transition Page

15. Green Dorm Space System

16. Green Dorm SCHEMATIC DESIGN NARRATIVE Systems Scopes: Site Structure Skin Waste Mechanical Space water

17. Green Dorm Systems Scopes: Site Structure Skin Waste Mechanical Space water SCHEMATIC DESIGN NARRATIVE

18. Green Dorm PRESENT STATE NARRATIVE

19. Green Dorm FUTURE STATE NARRATIVE

20. Owner Stakeholders Users OperatorsDonors Architects Engineers Contractors Students Faculty Researchers Neighbors Visitors Maintenance Housing Facilities Manager Cleaning Services Corporations Alumni Individuals Board of Trustees President Provost University Officials EHDD Campus Architect Landscape Architect Interior Designer Consulting Architects Structural: Tipping Mar Mechanical: Taylor Eng. Electrical: Integrated Design Assoc. Civil: Sherwood Design Faculty Consultants: CEE Dept. General Contractor: Pankow Builders Sub-contractors Gatekeepers Fire Marshall and Police Occupational Health & Safety County Codes and Permits Parking & Transportation Green Dorm Space System Teams Model

21. Living Lab Most Desirable Housing Economic Sustainability Community Environmental Quality ExperimentationDemonstration Sense of Privacy Dynamic Social Life Good Neighbor Access to Research & Education Promotes Sustainable Life Style Design & Construction Process Monitoring Vehicle Energy Building Structure Building Materials Water Influence on Stanford Proving Good Building Technology Noteworthy “wow” Factor Thermal Comfort Healthy Material IAQ Lighting Quality Acoustic Quality Measurable Environmental Performance Zero CO2 Closed Water Cycle Material Resources Water Efficiency Water Capture & Recycling Reduce Earthquake Losses Material Efficiency Design for Adaptability & Construction Low Embodied Energy Low/no Carbon Emissions Reduce Energy Use First CostLife cycle Costs Completion Data Green Dorm Space System Goals Model Personal Space

22. Living Lab Most Desirable Housing Economic Sustainability Community Measurable Environmental Performance Zero CO2 Reduce Energy Use First Cost Personal Space Green Dorm METRICS Three Analyzed Metrics:

23. Green Dorm METRICS Reduce First Cost: +3: 30% Less Expensive +2: 20% +1: 10% 0: Baseline Green -1: 10% -2: 20% -3: 30% More Expensive

24. Green Dorm METRICS Reduce Energy Use: +3: 30% Less Energy Use +2: 20% +1: 10% 0: Baseline Green -1: 10% -2: 20% -3: 30% More Energy

25. Green Dorm METRICS Personal Space: +3: 30% More Space +2: 20% +1: 10% 0: Baseline – Campus Housing Average -1: 10% -2: 20% -3: 30% Less Space

26. Innovation – Granularity Reduction Our proposed innovation to MACDADI is to reduce the granularity inherent in the +3/-3 metric system This granularity often causes design options to be punished for being between 2 points in a given metric. For example, a 1.4 would be treated as a 1 We propose to simply have decimals behind each rating (i.e. +2.65 or -1.45). 0123-3-2 1.4 0123-3-2 Current State: Proposed State: