Mary Ann Cofrin Hall

Location

Green Bay, WI

USA

Staticmap?center=44.5333, 87.9166&size=175x175&scale=2&markers=color:red%7csize:small%7c44.5333, 87
Building type
Higher education
Floor Area (ft2)
120000.0
Floor Area (m2)
11148
Date of Occupancy/ Completion
2001-09-01
Annual Water Use (gal/ft2)
0.0
Annual Water Use (L/m2)
0.0
Annual Energy Generated (kBtu/ft2)
2.38
Annual Energy Generated (MJ/m2)
27.12
Annual Purchased Energy (kBtu/ft2)
77
Annual Purchased Energy (MJ/m2)
877
Total Project Cost (land excluded)($US)
14000000.0
Certifications & Awards
Project Team
  • Owner: University of Wisconsin

Summary

The new two-story academic building at the University of Wisconson-Green Bay serves as a new campus center housing 20 classrooms, representing about half of all classroom space on campus.

This building was originally imported from the U.S. Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Building Technologies Database (http://eere.buildinggreen.com/overview.cfm?projectid=74) on 2009-06-06.

Overview

  • Location: Green Bay, WI
  • Building type(s): Higher education
  • 98% new construction, 2% renovation
  • 120,000 sq. feet (11,100 sq. meters)
  • Project scope: 2-story building
  • Urban setting
  • Completed September 2001

The new two-story academic building at the University of Wisconson-Green Bay serves as a new campus center housing 20 classrooms, representing about half of all classroom space on campus.

Environmental Aspects

In accordance with its strong environmental studies program, the university wanted a building that would help strengthen its focus on environmental issues. The state's goal was to make the project a model for energy conservation by reducing energy consumption for heating, cooling, and lighting by at least 50% compared to similar buildings. The state also wanted to promote the potential environmental and economic benefits of using renewable energy resources.

Owner & Occupancy

  • Owned and occupied by University of Wisconsin
  • Typically occupied by 1,100 people

Building Programs

Indoor Spaces: Classroom (40%), Office (20%), Circulation (12%), Lobby/reception (6%), Mechanical systems (5%), Laboratory (5%), Conference (5%), Restrooms (4%), Electrical systems (3%)
Outdoor Spaces: Wildlife habitat (40%), Interpretive landscape (20%), Drives/roadway (15%), Shade structures/outdoor rooms (10%), Patio/hardscape (10%), Pedestrian/non-motorized vehicle path (5%)

Keywords

Simulation, Indigenous vegetation, Efficient fixtures and appliances, Insulation levels, Lighting control and daylight harvesting, Efficient lighting, On-site renewable electricity, Benign materials, Recycled materials, C&D waste management, Occupant recycling, Daylighting, Low-emitting materials

Team & Process

The university's proposed move-in date combined with the state's extensive review process created a fast-track design schedule.

Design Charrette

The design process began with a four-day charrette in April 1998. During this brainstorming meeting the team met with university faculty, students, and staff to discuss design goals, tour the site, and develop initial concepts. The team then refined the design options, based in part on a series of public meetings, energy model evaluations, systems development studies, and site analyses. The university selected a final scheme in late June 1998.

Early Energy Studies

As part of the design workshop, the team created a DOE-2 energy model and discussed energy conservation ideas. These early studies were an important part of the conceptual design. The model was also updated regularly as the design progressed.

Led by the team's energy and daylighting consultant—Architectural Energy Corporation (AEC) of Boulder, Colorado—the team created a hypothetical "reference" building design based on the architectural program and current practice levels of energy efficiency as defined by the Wisconson Commercial Building Energy Code.

After acquiring Green Bay climatological data and information about local utility rates, the team used DOE-2 building energy analysis software to simulate energy use. AEC created a series of elimination parametrics to evaluate the overall impact of each individual building component, including lighting, people, equipment loads, ventilation, and skin. This data provided the first set of energy conservation targets.

As the initial high-energy components were lowered, other areas became more important in the overall energy use of the building. The team then initiated additional sets of elimination parametrics and conservation strategies until no more energy-conserving strategies could be identified.

LEED System

The team used the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Green Building Rating System as a design guide and decision-making tool. The project is expected to earn a Gold LEED rating.

Daylighting Studies

AEC built two daylighting models with changeable parts so that different strategies could be studied as the building design developed, to test and refine the concepts. One model featured one of the building's large lecture halls with a skylight and integrated daylight deflector. The other model included a circulation corridor with a daylight monitor, and adjacent office areas using a clerestory daylighting system.

The university's director of buildings and grounds, along with key staff members, was involved in all aspects of the programming and design. This will familiarize the owner's team with operations and help them understand the best, healthiest maintenance systems for the building.

  • The Wisconsin Commercial Buildings Energy Code was a base, reducing the building's projected energy use by 60%.

  • DOE-2 modeling studies enabled the team to reduce energy use by another 15-17%.

[](learnmore.cfm?ProjectID=74) [Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.](learnmore.cfm?ProjectID=74) Architect [http://www.hoksustainabledesign.com](http://www.hoksustainabledesign.com)

Finance & Cost

Cost data in U.S. dollars as of date of completion.

  • Total project cost (land excluded): $14,000,000

With a tight budget and a difficult site, the design team's first priority was to satisfy the university's space needs. Even so, most of the sustainable design features were achieved within the base budget.

The team evaluated each energy conservation feature on a life-cycle basis and implemented many. For example, the energy model predicted that extensive daylighting could create energy savings in excess of $18,000 per year. The proposed daylighting strategies thus will pay for themselves in approximately five years.

The payback analysis was complicated, however, by the fact that the state of Wisconson pays all utility bills directly, so the university had no direct financial incentive to include energy conservation measures. As a result, the university has recommended that the state change this administrative procedure to give users financial incentives to conserve energy.

Demonstration Technologies

Some sustainable design features that are not yet cost-effective but could be funded separately were included in the design to demonstrate emerging technologies. For example, the local utility, Wisconson Public Service, has funded building-integrated photovoltaic panels for the project, to research this technology and to investigate the effectiveness of distributed power generation in this northern climate.

Additional design features include demonstration gardens, constructed wetlands or "living machines" for wastewater treatment, and an interior "living wall" made up of plant life that acts as a natural biofilter to clean the air.

Land Use & Community

One of the design goals for this new building was to provide a physical and metaphorical "front door" to the campus.

This new building was sited carefully so that it will help form a quadrangle space between this new building and the existing library and student union. The quadrangle will serve as an entry point to the campus and a trailhead to the path that leads to the main arboretum.

Designed in the 1960s, the University of Wisconsin's original campus at Green Bay has a windowless below-grade tunnel system connecting all the buildings. The new facility creates a new circulation system for the campus that is daylit and visually connected to the campus green spaces.

New connecting tunnels between the buildings are inset into the landscape, with the entire length of the tunnels glazed and open to a newly defined central quadrangle on one side. By completing the final side of the quadrangle with a building, a gathering space has been created that is sheltered from the wind.

  • Responsible Planning

    • Ensure that development fits within a responsible local and regional planning framework

  • Support for Appropriate Transportation

    • Design development to have pedestrian emphasis rather than automobile emphasis

    • Provide safe access for bicyclers and pedestrians
    • Provide storage area for bicycles
  • Property Selection Opportunities

    • Look for a property where infrastructure needs can be combined

Site Description

Landscape Design

The building courtyard was developed as a demonstration area for native plants, extending the existing arboretum into the campus core.

The entire building site, including the new campus quadrangle, was replanted with low-maintenance native plant materials to replace the preexisting high-maintenance, nonnative landscape of turf grass and ornamental plants.

Water

A rainwater harvesting system has been proposed for the courtyard. If incorporated, this system will collect rainwater from the roof structures and store it in pools and/or cisterns in the building courtyard, for irrigation and other nonpotable uses.

Water-conserving plumbing fixtures and appliances that exceed the requirements of the U.S. Energy Policy Act of 1992 were selected.

Water Conservation and Use

Water Use

  • Landscape Plantings

    • Landscape with indigenous vegetation
    • Minimize turf area
  • Low-Water-Use Fixtures

    • Use low-flow toilets
  • Rainwater Collection

    • Collect and store rainwater for landscape irrigation
  • Siting Analysis

    • Assess regional climatic conditions

Energy

DOE-2 energy models indicated that the building's energy consumption will be 60% less than that for a base-case building designed to be minimally compliant with the Wisconsin Commercial Building Energy Code.

Early energy modeling indicated that heating energy required for ventilation air in the classrooms represented the single largest component of the baseline building's annual energy performance. The next-largest component was lighting energy. The design team thus focused on ventilation and electric lighting as the two biggest opportunities for energy savings in the initial approach to energy conservation.

Controlled Ventilation

Ventilating the classrooms requires a great deal of energy. To reduce this load, the building automation system will be reprogrammed each semester to reflect the new class schedules. Ventilation will be supplied to a classroom only when a class is in session. A manual override equipped with a timer will accommodate unscheduled gatherings.

Building Envelope

The team designed the exterior building envelope with a high R-value for walls and windows. To reflect the different orientations, the windows on all four sides have different transmission characteristics. All glass is gas-filled and has a low-e coating. The building exterior walls are approximately R-35 (RSI-6.2), and the roof is approximately R-50 (RSI-8.8).

Solar heat gain during summer months and heat loss during winter months are reduced by high-performance low-e glazings that are "tuned" to respond to their orientations. The glazing also plays an important role in ensuring visual comfort throughout the building's daylit spaces.

Daylighting

Because both the architectural program and the preliminary energy modeling identified daylighting as a significant energy conservation opportunity, daylighting strategies had a considerable impact on the building's shape and the configuration of spaces. The design was developed to maximize the combined impact of windows, rooftop skylights, and light monitors on the interior spaces.

Daylight supplies most of the building's ambient lighting. To provide even, diffuse light in the large lecture halls, skylights channel daylight through light shafts with suspended, perforated daylight deflectors that diffuse light and redirect it across the ceiling plane. The result is an illuminated ceiling that provides sufficient general lighting without using the electric fixtures. Motorized blackout shade panels are available for times in which classes need to use audiovisual equipment.

All major circulation spaces are daylit, ensuring that users rarely lose sight of the outside. The second-floor faculty offices are daylit from clerestory windows that bring borrowed light from the main circulation corridor into each office.

The partially below-grade concourse connections to other campus buildings will be glazed to provide light and a visual connection to the lower-level central quadrangle, a substantial improvement over the university's current use of windowless tunnels.

Electric Lighting

To maintain classroom lighting levels, the design incorporates a combination of daylighting and electric lighting with dimmable electronic ballasts. Photocells measure light from daylight sources. On a bright day, the clerestory windows will enable the system to turn off unnecessary lights. On overcast days or evenings, the system will adjust the fluorescent fixtures to the required light level.

Ninety percent of all lighting fixtures are fluorescent, which provides efficiency, easy maintenance, and a long life span. Indirect/direct fluorescent pendants provide an illuminated ceiling of ambient light and direct tabletop light. These lamps have a life span of 20,000 hours, which means they will need replacing only once every three years. To control lighting during unoccupied hours, most of the building's electric lighting is controlled by occupancy sensors.

Mechanical Systems

An outside air economizer cycle will supply outside air for cooling and ventilation during summer months or when outside temperatures permit. While operable windows were considered and rejected, the outside air economizer provides "free cooling" in much the same way, by delivering 100% outside air when temperature and humidity permit.

Transpired Solar Collector and Preheating System

Green Bay, located on the shores of Lake Michigan, experiences air temperatures as low as 40 degrees F below zero (-40 C) during winter months, which results in a considerable requirement for heating outside air during winter. In response, the team explored opportunities to reduce energy consumption by using solar energy to preheat ventilation air. The team chose to integrate a low-cost solar preheating system developed by Conserval Systems of Buffalo, New York, and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Known as a transpired air solar collector, the system is a perforated metal collector painted black to absorb solar radiation. Convection draws the intake air through the perforations into the cavity behind. There, the solar-heated metal panels preheat the air, so it enters the building many degrees warmer than the outside air. These panels make up the finished portion of several sections of the building's south exterior wall.

Renewable Energy

The building design incorporates two types of building-integrated photovoltaic panels designed by Massachusetts-based Solar Design Associates.

One system comprises thin-film technology integrated with the standing-seam metal roof that makes up the building's major roofing system.

The second type is a translucent film-on-glass panel that forms the primary roof element over the winter garden as well as part of the vertical south-facing glass. This represents the first commercial use of this thin-film technology in the United States. These panels will be directly connected to the building's electric power grid.

Efficient Equipment

Many of the computers and other types of office equipment used in the new building are older models with a wide range of energy efficiency ratings. The design team has recommended that all future equipment purchases carry an Energy Star label.

 

Materials & Resources

The design team sought out materials and products for the building that would provide improved performance while reducing environmental impacts related to the raw materials, the production process, installation and use, and resource recovery.

AAC Concrete

An aerated autoclaved cellular concrete (AAC) building unit was proposed for exterior walls as a load-bearing material. The AAC concrete blocks have a high R-value, are easy to work with, and use significantly less concrete than standard concrete masonry units.

Carpet

The specifications called for the carpet to have a high percentage of recycled content and to come from manufacturers with reclamation and recycling programs.

Renewable Materials

Linoleum flooring, a biodegradable, renewable material made from linseed oil, rosins, cork, and wood flour, is used in classrooms. Bamboo flooring, a hard, durable material made from the rapidly renewable bamboo plant, is used as a demonstration product in place of typical wood flooring in conference rooms and gathering spaces.

Recycled-Content Materials

Gypsum wallboard material uses recycled-content gypsum and kraft paper. Acoustic ceiling tile is made of recycled cellulose and mineral slag. Panel fabric and upholstery fabric is 100% post-consumer recycled polyester from soda bottles.

The specified ceramic tile has more than 60% recycled-content, post-industrial feldspar waste as its primary raw material. The manufacturing process is a closed system for solid waste accumulation and reuse.

Low-VOC Materials

All paint, adhesives, and finishes are water-based and low in VOCs.

Non-Ozone-Depleting Materials

No ozone-depleting CFCs, HCFCs, or halons are used in the mechanical systems. Building materials have been selected to reduce or eliminate CFCs and HCFCs from the manufacturing process.

User Recycling

The University of Wisconsin-Green Bay already has an extensive recycling program. The new building joined these existing programs and provides built-in areas for user recycling.

The team set a goal of reducing construction waste by 90% as compared to standard practices.

Working with the state waste reduction office—one of the building occupants—the team prepared a detailed construction waste specification. A list of local firms that accept various construction materials for recycling was provided to each construction firm bidding on the project. Before construction began, the team worked with the contractor to develop a detailed construction waste management plan.

  • Transpired Solar Thermal Collector

  • Recyclable Materials

    • Specify carpet from manufacturers who will recycle used carpet
  • Job Site Recycling

    • Investigate local infrastructure for recycling
    • Require a waste management plan from the contractor
  • Recycling by Occupants

    • Specify recycling receptacles that are accessible to the occupants

  • Toxic Upstream or Downstream Burdens

    • Use true linoleum flooring
  • Post-Consumer Recycled Materials

    • Specify carpet made with recycled-content face fiber

Indoor Environment

The use of natural light and views to the outside create a positive learning environment. The extensive use of daylight, together with design strategies that limit glare and direct sunlight, will improve visual comfort.

To ensure good indoor air quality, the building's mechanical systems and ventilation rates have been designed to meet ASHRAE Standard 62, the industry's voluntary standard for indoor air quality.

Source Control

To reduce potential sources of contamination, the team carefully reviewed materials to minimize chemical offgassing from the material itself, as well as from chemicals used for cleaning and maintenance. Detailing was developed to minimize potential sites for microbial growth. For example, no fibrous building insulation will be located where it can come into contact with the airstream.

To expel contaminants that may accumulate in the building as wet materials cure during construction, the design team worked with the contractor to develop a detailed construction sequencing plan and establish minimum ventilation rates during construction.

The building design also decreases the introduction of contaminants into the building by providing separate storage areas for cleaning chemicals. Building vestibules with recessed entry gratings reduce the introduction of dirt and particulates into the building.

  • Visual Comfort and The Building Envelope

    • Use skylights and/or clerestories for daylighting
  • Reduction of Indoor Pollutants

    • Use only very low or no-VOC paints
  • Ventilation During Construction

    • Use adequate ventilation during installation and curing of thermal insulation

  • Maintenance for IEQ

    • Specify use of only nontoxic cleaning products

Bringing you a prosperous future where energy is clean, abundant, reliable, and affordableBringing you a prosperous future where energy is clean, abundant, reliable, and affordable

Learn More

  • Books

    • University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, Mary Ann Cofrin Hall, Green Bay, Wisconsin Editors: Lazarus, Mary Ann; Mendler, Sandra F.; Odell, William
      Publication: The HOK Guidebook to Sustainable Design, 2nd Edition (Nov 2005) ISBN: 978-0-471-69613-1
      The practical reference guide on the integration of sustainable, high performance design covers major sustainability issues on an introductory level.

  • Web sites

    • MAC Hall

      Information about Mary Ann Cofrin (MAC) Hall as part of the UW- Green Bay virtual tour.

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. Architect   [http://www.hoksustainabledesign.com](http://www.hoksustainabledesign.com)