SUSTAINABLE HISTORIC PRESERVATION: A REHABILITATION PLAN FOR THE JEFF. SMITH'S PARLOR MUSEUM IN SKAGWAY, ALASKA by TARA L. IKENOUYE A THESIS Presented to the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science June 2009 "Sustainable Historic Preservation: A Rehabilitation Plan for the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum in Skagway, Alaska," a thesis prepared by Tara L. Ikenouye in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: 11 Donald L. Peting, Chair of the Examining mmittee Date Committee in Charge: Accepted by: Donald L. Peting, Chair Grant Crosby, NPS Historical Architect Dean of the Graduate School © 2009 Tara L. Ikenouye 111 IV An Abstract of the Thesis of Tara 1. Ikenouye for the degree of Master of Science in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation to be taken June 2009 Title: SUSTAINABLE HISTORIC PRESERVATION: A REHABILITATION PLAN FOR THE JEFF. SMITH'S PARLOR MUSEUM IN SKAGWAY, ALASKA Approved: _Donal~~ In an effort to confront global warming and the increasing scarcity of resources, the preservation community began several years ago to adopt sustainable and green building practices and metrics for historic rehabilitation projects. As a result, there is an ever growing number of rehabilitated historic buildings in the United States not only incorporating sustainable building designs but also achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. Most of these are large, architect-designed buildings in urban settings rehabilitated for cultural and commercial uses. This thesis explores the application of the LEED 2009 New Construction and Major Renovation Rating System for the development of a sustainable rehabilitation plan for the modest vernacular 1897 Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum in Skagway, Alaska. The goal of this research is to demonstrate how the LEED rating system might be applied to the rehabilitation of this building and other historic vernacular buildings. CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Tara L. Ikenouye PLACE OF BIRTH: Greeley, Colorado DATE OF BIRTH: February 5, 1975 GRADUATE AND UJ'JDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon Pacific Northwest College of Art, Portland, Oregon Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio DEGREES AWARDED: Master of Science, Historic Preservation, June 2009, University of Oregon Bachelor of Arts, Biology major, Chemistry minor, 1998, Oberlin College PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Graduate Teaching Fellow, University of Oregon, September 2007 - June 2009 Historic Preservation Intern, National Park Service, June 2008 - September 2008 Program Coordinator, Legacy Health System, January 2002 - September 2007 Care Manager, Legacy Health System, November 2000 - December 2001 Legislative Assistant, Oregon Senator Laurie Monnes-Anderson, January 2001 - July 2001 GRANTS, AWARDS AND HONORS: The Betty Peting Traveling Fellowship Recipient, University of Oregon, 2009 Vice President, Associated Students for Historic Preservation, University of Oregon, 2008-2009 Bus Shelter Design, Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) Portland, Oregon, 2003 v VI ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express sincere appreciation to my thesis committee chair Professor Don Peting and committee member Grant Crosby for their guidance and faithful support throughout this process. I also thank: all of the park staff at the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park in Skagway, Alaska. Thank: you for introducing me to Soapy and his parlor. And thank: you to Jessica Keskitalo, high school history teacher by day and my editor by night. Jessica edited almost every paper that I wrote in the last two years including this manuscript and I am sincerely grateful to her for her friendship and generosity. I dedicate this manuscript to my parents, Ken and Sandy Ikenouye. VB Vlll TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. LEED AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION 6 LEED 2009 6 Rehabilitation of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum 7 History of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum 7 Building Description 22 National Park Service Rehabilitation Plan 36 III. PROPOSED LEED-NC 2009 REHABILITATION PLAN FOR THE JEFF. SMITH'S PARLOR MUSEUM 44 LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovation - Overview 44 Sustainable Sites (SS) Credits - Overview 45 Water Efficiency (WE) Credits - Overview 53 Energy and Atmosphere (EA) Credits- Overview 56 Materials and Resources (MR) Credits - Overview 62 Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) Credits - Overview 68 Innovation in Design (ID) Credits - Overview 79 Regional Priority (RP) Credits - Overview 81 Projected LEED-NC Certification 82 IV. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION 85 Analysis 85 Conclusion 94 APPENDICES 98 A. HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY DRAWINGS 98 Chapter IX Page B. CONDITION ASSESSMENT 116 C. LEED 2009 NEW CONSTRUCTION AND MAJOR RENOVATION SCORECARD 140 BIBLIOGRAPHy 143 xLIST OF FIGURES Figure Chapter 2 Page 1. Map of Skagway based on 1999 National Historical Landmark Nomination form indicating the historica11ocations of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum building 9 2. The First Bank of Skaguay, ca. 1897 (circled) 10 3. Jeff. Smith's Parlor ca. 1897 12 4. "Mirror Saloon," Sept. 23, 1898 Skagway News advertisement.. 13 5. "Clancy's," Jan. 16, 1898, Daily Alaskan advertisement 13 6. "Re-Opened Clancy's," Jan. 16, 1898, Daily Alaskan advertisement.. .13 7. "Sans Souci," Jan. 16, 1898, Daily Alaskan advertisement.. 13 8. Hook and Ladder Shed (museum building) on the right with female figure standing in front, ca. 1915 15 9. Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, 1979 (NW) 20 10. Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, 1979 (NE) .20 11. The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, July 2008 .21 12. The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum west elevation with section labels 22 13. The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum northeast comer and surrounding site 23 14. The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum plan with room labels 24 15. Log foundation along east wall of section A-I .25 16. Log foundation along west wall of section A-2 .25 17. East elevation with board and batten siding .27 18. Windows and main doorway on north elevation 28 19. Window and metal bars on east elevation 29 20. Metal gable roof of section Band C southwest elevation 30 21. Attic A-I rafters at ridgeline 31 22. Attic B ridgeboard, rafters and collar ties 31 23. Room A-I looking north 32 Figure Chapter 2 (continued) Xl Page 24. Room A-2 looking toward northeast comer 34 25. Room C wildlife diorama 34 26. Knob and tube electric wiring in northeast comer of Room A-I 35 27. Sink and plumbing in bathroom 36 Chapter 3 1. Basic services within 1/2 mile radius of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum - SS Credit 2 48 2. Public transportation within 1/4 mile radius of The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum - SS Credit 4.1 49 3. Site Restoration - gray shaded area represents approximately 20% of site square footage 52 4. Regional Materials - 500 mile radius around Skagway, Alaska 69 Chapter 4 1. Percentage of total possible points in each credit category that the proposed LEED-NC Silver and Gold certifications for The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum earns 93 -----~~~~~~~------------------ ---- Xll LIST OF TABLES Table Chapter 3 Page 1. Contaminant Concentration Limits for Indoor Air Quality Testing 72 2. VOC Limits for Adhesives and Sealants 74 3. VOC Limits for Paints and Coatings 75 4. Proposed Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum LEED-NC Credits Eligible for Exemplary Points 80 5. LEED-NC Certification Estimates for The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum 82 Chapter 4 1. Wells 2008 Case Study Historic LEED-Certified Buildings 87 2. Comparison of proposed LEED-NC Silver certification plan for the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum with Wells and Frey 88 1CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION We cannot build our way to sustainability; we must conserve our way to it. Carl Elefante, AlA, LEED AP, 2007 As preservationists we seek to preserve the physical fabric that makes up our built environment and informs our cultural history. We are concerned with the fate of the resources we protect and in discussing sustainability and how best to reduce our carbon footprint, we along with Anthony Veerkamp, of the National Trust for Historic Preservation ask "instead of building new, why not take care of what we already have?"] In recent years, green has become a call to action, "go green!" as the nation and the world confront rising oil prices, rising oceans, melting ice packs and increasing scarcity of resources. Without deliberate action by all industries, sectors and citizens toward sustainability and conservation to reduce carbon and greenhouse gas emissions this trend will continue. The preservation community must continue to lead the way in conservation. Sustainability and conservation have always been central tenets of the preservation movement. During the energy crisis of the 1970s, the preservation community advocated building reuse as an energy efficiency strategy. Reuse of an existing building is the reuse of its embodied energy; the energy already invested from 1 Veerkamp, Anthony. "A Preservation Response to Global Warming: Jumping on the Bandwagon or Leading Our Own Parade?" Forum Journal v. 23, no. 0 1 (Fall 2008), 35. 2extraction, transport, manufacture, assembly, installation, disassembly, deconstruction and/or decomposition. In 1979, The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation commissioned a report, "Assessing the Energy Conservation Benefits of Historic Preservation: Methods and Examples," to study the correlation between historic preservation and energy conservation. This report (which is currently being revisited) established methods to calculate the amount of energy embodied in a building based on materials and methods used to construct the building. For example, the energy embodied in 1 cubic yard of concrete or enough concrete for a 6'x9' foot 6" inch thick slab is equivalent to approximately 22.5 gallons of gasoline.2 Or, 10 board feet or a 12' long 1" x 6"piece of hardwood flooring embodies 142,830 Btus which is equivalent to 1 and a quarter gallon of gasoline. 3 This report established some of the core arguments that are used today to promote preservation and building reuse as sustainable practices: • Once energy is embodied in a building, it cannot be recovered or used for another purpose • Preservation saves energy by taking advantage of the nonrecoverable energy embodied in an existing building and extending the use of it. • Publicizing the energy conservation benefits of preservation can increase public awareness of this hidden benefit ofpreservation.4 2 This data is updated from the 1979 calculations to include 114,500 Btu/gallon of gasoline estimates based on the 2007 EPA Fuel Economy Impact Analysis of Reformulated Gasoline for summer months. 3 Ibid. 4 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, "Assessing the Energy Conservation Benefits of Historic Preservation: Methods and Examples," Washington, D.C., 1979, p. 15. 3Thirty years later the preservation community is still promoting building reuse as a responsible practice and more recently began advocating for the integration of green building technologies in the rehabilitation treatments of historic buildings. As a result there is an ever growing number of rehabilitated historic buildings in the United States incorporating not only sustainable building designs but also achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. Developed by the US Green Building Council (USGBC) in 2000, LEED is a rating system that provides a framework for "identifying and implementing practical and measurable green building design, construction, operations and maintenance solutions."s LEED is the most widely recognized standard for green building in the United States and is often used to demonstrate a building's sustainability. Aside from the environmental benefits of a high performing LEED-certified building like energy use reduction, improved air quality and use of rapidly renewable materials; there are economic benefits of a LEED building. For example, in Maryland the state rehabilitation tax credit is 20% for regular projects and 25% if LEED Gold certification can be achieved. 6 According to the USGBC as of January 2009 there were 17,450 registered and 2,122 certified LEED buildings in the United States. These numbers include many historic buildings; however, most historic buildings achieving LEED-certification are large, architect-designed buildings in urban settings that have been rehabilitated for cultural and commercial uses. This thesis 5 U.S. Green Building Council, USGBC: Intro - What LEED is. 2008, http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1988 (accessed March 15, 2009). 6 National Trust for Historic Preservation, PreservationNation» Blog Archive» It's Official! LEED Gold for President Lincoln's Cottage Visitor Education Center, April 6, 2009 http://blogs.nationaltrust.org/preservationnation/?p=3848 (accessed April 7, 2009). 4explores the application of the LEED rating system to the sustainable rehabilitation of The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, a historic vernacular building in Skagway, Alaska. Vernacular buildings, situated in common by materials, style, time and location, constitute a significant proportion of the historic building stock in the United States. Vernacular buildings like the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum were constructed by builders who used whatever materials were available and with whatever skills they possessed and are found throughout the United States.? However, there is little discussion about sustainable or LEED-based rehabilitations of historic vernacular buildings. 8 Often constructed with limited resources and long before the concept of high performance buildings or those that are considered green or sustainable by emphasizing technology to reduce environmental impacts and control building comfort measures began to influence design; the builders of these vernacular buildings relied on local materials, building location, operable windows, natural daylight and other sustainable design concepts to construct a building for their time and now ours. When rehabilitated there is the potential that alterations could be inconsistent with the building's sustainable legacy. The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum in Skagway, Alaska represents this challenge. Built in 1897, the museum is a Klondike Gold Rush-era building that is a contributing 7 Dell Upton and John Michael Vlach, Common Places: Readings in American Vernacular Architecture (Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1986), xvii. 8 Sophie Lambert, Director Neighborhood Development with USGBC and Barbara A. Campagna, FAlA, LEED AP, Graham Gund Architect of the National Trust, Stewardship of Historic Sites National Trust for Historic Preservation confirmed via email correspondence with author that there are no historic vernacular buildings registered or LEED certified at this point May 6, 2009. 5resource to the Skagway Historic District and White Pass National Historic Landmark.9 The National Park Service owns the museum and plans an extensive rehabilitation on this modest, wood plank building, to house a collection of artifacts related to the history of the building, Skagway and the Klondike Gold Rush. This thesis provides a discussion of the newest version ofLEED for New Construction and Major Renovations (LEED-NC) released in April 2009 as applied to the rehabilitation of the museum. The intent with this research is to indicate the LEED-NC credits that are useful, appropriate and attainable for the rehabilitation of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum and explore whether or not LEED-certification is necessary or beneficial to meet the sustainability goals of the rehabilitation project. Included in this project is a synthesis of findings from previous research related to LEED-certification for historic buildings with the intent to further common strategies and outcomes, and identify areas where additional research is necessary. 9 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. National Historic Landmark Nomination: Skagway and White Pass District. Washington, D.C.: United State Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1999, 12. 6CHAPTER II LEED AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION LEED 2009 Established in 1998 by the U. S. Green Building Council, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is a voluntary, consensus-based national rating system for developing high- performance, sustainable buildings that addresses all building types and emphasizes state-of-the-art strategies for sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials and resources selection, and indoor environmental quality. LEED is a practical rating tool for green building design and construction that provides immediate and measurable results for building owners and occupants. 1 LEED has undergone several revisions and in Apri12009 version 3.0 was released with a new weighted point system for credits tied to strategies with the greatest impact. The new LEED 2009 rating system is concerned most with climate change and credits related to reducing a building's carbon footprint are worth more points. The point distribution in LEED 2009 changed but the credits did not. Previous versions of LEED were critiqued by preservationists for overlooking the importance of preserving buildings for cultural value; not effectively considering the performance, longer service lives, and embodied energy ofhistoric materials and assemblies; and being overly focused on future 1 u.s. Green Building Council, November 10, 2008, http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1816& (accessed November 11, 2008). 7technologies, neglecting the advantages of many traditional building practices.2 In 2006, the National Trust for Historic Preservation created a Sustainable Preservation Coalition to work with the USGBC to revise the LEED rating system. Throughout 2008 the Coalition and the USGBC have worked to incorporate more social and cultural metrics in the LEED 2009 version. The rehabilitation of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum will adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings and possibly LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation (LEED-NC) 2009. The treatment plan for the museum includes rehabilitating the building as a museum to house a collection of artifacts related to the history of Skagway, Alaska and the Klondike Gold Rush. The poor condition of the building necessitates a significant rehabilitation to the building envelope, foundation and interior finishes. This rehabilitation will serve as an early test application of the LEED-NC rating system for a historic building in Alaska, but also the first building in the Skagway District of the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park in Skagway, Alaska that is LEED certified. Rehabilitation of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum History ofthe Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum is significant not only for its association with the Klondike Gold Rush phenomenon but also for the post gold rush individuals who owned and maintained the building to keep the story of Skagway in the mind of the 2 Campagna, Barbara A., "How Changes to LEED Will Benefit Existing And Historic Buildings," Forum News, NovemberlDecember 2008, 2. 8touring public for over a hundred years. Many visitors today still visit the Parlor Museum even though its doors have been closed to the public for over twenty years. Given its close proximity to the Klondike Gold Rush Historical Park Headquarters and the popular Red Onion Saloon that is across the street, many visitors walk to the museum for pictures or as part of a tour. In the nineteenth century, the Klondike Gold Rush attracted international attention to Skagway as stampeders, merchants, photographers, entrepreneurs and con men all sought fortunes in the mountains beyond. Today the city of Skagway continues to host international visitors as part of the city's thriving tourist and cruise industry. Many of these visitors are attracted to the story of Jefferson "Soapy" Smith; a story made vibrant through the work of Martin Itjen and George Rapuzzi, and the existence of the Parlor Museum. First Bank of Skagway: 1897 Like many buildings in Skagway, the museum building was moved several times to accommodate the needs of whomever the present owner happens to be at the time. Most buildings in Skagway were moved to Broadway after the boom years of the 1897 gold rush-era to create an easily accessible business district for the fewer and fewer visitors that were coming to Skagway. The museum was moved in 1916 and again in 1963 to its present location on Second Avenue one block east ofBroadway (see Figure 1). Originally constructed in 1897 (exact date is not known) on the north side of Sixth Avenue between Broadway and State streets, the museum building was most likely the First Bank of Skaguay (see Figure 2). After the First Bank of Skaguay [sic] moved 91"'-' '-'1 ri• '"1..1 II jCJ CI ' -, l~; ! '.1 U I : l::'J1.._•.21963--@ ,r I'J If~LI r'~ r1:)1 i ::~' ' 'I1'" it,~~;]. .J. J .., Ii 'TJ ~ II I '1 'I [I Ii! '.jLI [.td .L..::,'J..... J[......, 1.;" I·j- Ii 1 l ••••. J .j .! • • •• • • 1963 1916 • NPS 1897 l::§§l NHL Contributing Properties C~__''---:'-'" (9) -- Figure 1. Map of Skagway based on 1999 National Historical Landmark Nomination form indicating the historical locations of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum building. ownership of the building transferred to Frank Clancy in partnership with Jefferson Randolph "Soapy" Smith? Jeff. Smith's Parlor: 1897-1898 Born in Georgia, Smith arrived in Skagway in 1897 along with his gang of thieves and con men. Smith earned the moniker "Soapy" in Denver, Colorado, from one of his con games in which he sold soap wrapped in paper money ranging from one to hundreds of dollars. Smith would auction these bars of soap wrapped in the money and bagged, to an audience of fortune seekers. Inevitably Smith would sell all of his bars of soap but 3 Karl Gurcke, NPS Historian Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park unpublished history of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, July 2008. 10 Figure 2. The First Bank ofSkaguay, ca. 1897 (circled). Source: Image courtesy of Alaska State Library, print P258-III-85-795A Robert DeArmond Photograph Collection; Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (KLGO) 6th-19-ll03. those wrapped in hundreds of dollars would only land in the hands of his gang members disguised in the audience. Smith ran cons like this through Denver and other mining boom towns in Colorado in the l890s before following the gold rush north to Alaska. Smith's tenure in Skagway was short but notable. Upon arrival in 1897 he set up shop in the museum building and commenced with his cons and deleterious activitic,s. The following is a description of the operation Smith ran from the "Jeff. Sr,lith's Parlors" (see Figure 3): 11 It looked innocent enough, with its polished mahogany bar, its fretwork screens, and its artificial palm trees, but into Jeffs Parlor the suckers were lured like so many flies ....Behind the main restaurant and bar was a pretty back parlor, as cozy as a lady's boudoir, and it was here the unwary were cheated or robbed of their money. Behind this was a small yard enclosed by a high board fence especially constructed with a secret exit through which Smith's gang could disappear with their loot. The enrage[d] victim, rushing after his vanishing bankroll, would burst out the back door only to be baffled by an empty lot and a blank wall. This was the place where the innocents were sometimes taken for a look at 'the eagle' only to be slugged and robbed while they were admiring the bird, a stuffed specimen of uncertain age.4 Not four days after Smith served as the grand marshal of the July 4th parade in Skagway was he dead at the hands of vigilante Frank Reid. Earlier this week in 1898 members of Smith's gang robbed the gold of a miner just returned from the gold fields. Enraged and fed up by Smith and his gang some of the citizens of Skagway banded together to enact mob justice. Smith died in a shootout with Reid when Smith went to confront this mob. Reid was also shot in this exchange died several days later. Hook and Ladder Company: ca. 1900-1924 After Smith's death the museum building appears to have passed through several owners and functions between 1899 and 1900 (see Figures 4 - 6). In 1900 the museum building owner Lee Guthrie granted the building to the City of Skagway to use for the Hook and Ladder Company Number 1.5 As indicated in the 1898 Sans Souci advertisement the museum building (then the restaurant) was adjacent to Hose Co. No.1 4 Robertson, Frank C. and Beth Kay Harris, Soapy Smith: King ofthe Frontier Con Men, (New York: Hastings House Publishers, 1961), p. 191-192. 5 Karl Gurcke, NPS Historian Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park unpublished history of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, July 2008. 12 (see Figure 7). Together these two buildings housed the volunteer fire department through the 1920s and 30s. During this time though the building was altered with the rearrangement of the front door and windows to accommodate the double bay doors necessary for the Hook and Ladder truck. The museum was also moved to the other south side of Sixth Avenue in 1916. Figure 3. Jeff. Smith's Parlor ca. 1897. Source: Image ZZ-95359 courtesy of Royal BC Museum, BC Archives; KLGO 6th-50-5600. ~"",,-,,,,''''ct~ g.cvt OOWI HOLLY. NEAR BROIl1JWAY, , Only tile Choicest (If the Choice Kept ill "Stock, <1> FRANK ,OLANOY, prop. Figure 4. "Mirror Saloon," Sept. 23, 1898 Skagway News advertisement. Digitally enhanced. Finest Oentlelllan's .Resort In ~kaltUav Strperlor Bl'IIIlds of WJncunl! LIquors choice Kev Weit and. Domestic ClgaB, HoU.... Street. ne.r Broadw~. FrankCluc¥" Prql', Figure 5. "Clancy's," Jan. 16, 1898, Daily Alaskan advertisement. Digitally enhanced. Re·Opened~ The Clancy C.fc (In Sb:Lh J\\'"Il\l~ h,,~ l~<('ll r"yJ><,med llnd~r 11('''- nlBllll. ~L~1I111 : aDS Souci -===:\ ooocoo Restaurantoooooo pod Oyster Parlor ~VfRYTt1IIlQ HOLLY sT, (Sixth Ave.)I nm ~' 'r: ., .'~'/... " ',': *= letT. Smith's Parlor Museulll ' Figure 1. Basic services within 1/2 mile radius of the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum - SS Credit 2. SS Credit 4.4: Alternative Transportation-Parking Capacity (2 Points) Like SS Credit 4.1 this credit encourages the use of alternative means of transportation like the biking and walking that is common in Skagway, Alaska. The museum qualifies for this credit as it is a Case 1: Non-Residential project that does not 49 provide any new parking spaces. All parking associated with the museum and site is existing street parking. This is a Design Submittal credit. ' . .'(.'- = bus stop *= Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum Figure 2. Public transportation within 1/4 mile radius of The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum - SS Credit 4.1. SS Credit 5.1: Site Development-Protect or Restore Habitat (1 Point) The intent of this credit is to "conserve existing natural areas and restore damaged areas to provide habitat and promote biodiversity.,,6 To achieve these points and because this is a previously developed site, at least 50% of the site (excluding the building 6 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009/01' NelV Construction and Major Renovations, 12. 50 footprint) or 20% of the site (including building footprint) must be restored with native vegetation. Given that close to half of the museum site is open green space with at least one mature tree, if construction zones are well marked and activities confined to these zones the character defining features of this landscape can be protected. Site protection requirements like delineated disposal and recycling areas as well as protected vegetation should be included in construction documents and discussed with all personnel associated with construction activities.7 This is a Construction Submittal credit. SS Credit 5.2: Site Development-Maximize Open Space (l Point) Like the other Site Development credits the intent of SS Credit 5.2 is to preserve open space and promote biodiversity. The museum rehabilitation and site restoration must preserve at least 979 square feet of vegetated open space that equals 20% of the building site (see Figure 3). The documentation necessary for this credit requires a copy of drawings detailing the site and landscaped area(s) reserved for vegetated open space. Excluding the building (l038 sq. ft.) there is currently approximately 3860 sq. ft of open space around the site. This is a Design Submittal credit. SS Credit 8: Light Pollution Reduction (1 Point) SS Credit 8 is designed to "minimize light trespass from the building and site, reduce sky-glow to increase night sky access, improve nighttime visibility through glare 7 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED-NCfor New Construction R~rerence Guide Version 2.2. 1sl ed., Washington, D.C.: U.S. Green Building Council, October 2005, 68. 51 reduction and reduce development impact from lighting on nocturnal environments."g To achieve this point the museum must reduce the amount of interior lighting that escapes the building during nighttime hours and meet the requirements of Outdoor Lighting Zone 1(LZ1). This lighting zone includes places with a population density ofless than 200 people per square mile according to the U.S. Census and developed areas in state and national parks. From the 2000 census, the population of Skagway was 862 people with a population density of 1.9 people per square mile.9 To reduce interior light trespass there are two options available under this credit and the project must satisfy at least one. Option 1 involves the reduction of the input power (by automatic device) of all nonemergency interior luminaires with a direct line of sight to any openings in the envelope (translucent or transparent) by at least 50% between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. After-hours override may be provided by a manual or occupant- sensing device provided the override lasts no more than 30 minutes. Option 2 requires that all openings in the envelope (translucent or transparent) with a direct line of sight to any nonemergency luminaires must have shielding (controlled/closed by automatic device for a resultant transmittance of less than 10% between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m.). I0 To avoid significant building alteration and given that the museum only has two windows and two doors Option 1 seems the most appropriate for this credit. 8 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 19. 9 U.S. Census Bureau, u.s. Census Bureau Fact Finder, March 24,2009, http://factfinder.census.gov/home (accessed April 22, 2009). 10 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 19. 52 For exterior lighting in LZI all site and building-mounted luminaires must have an initial illuminance value no greater than 0.01 horizontal and vertical footcandles at site boundary and beyond. And none of the extemalluminaires may emit lumens at an angle of 90 degree or higher from straight down. This is a Design Submittal credit. Figure 3. Site Restoration - gray shaded area represents approximately 20% of site square footage. 53 Water Efficiency (WE) Credits - Overview LEED-NC 2009 Water Efficiency Credits address water use and reduction through efficient choices in landscaping, potable water use, wastewater technologies and overall water use reduction. There is one required prerequisite and 10 possible points in this category of which the museum is eligible for 6-8 points. WE Prerequisite 1: Water Use Reduction (Required) This is a new prerequisite for LEED-NC 2009 and is intended to increase water efficiency overall within the building thus reducing demand on the municipal water supply and wastewater systems. I I This prerequisite requires that in aggregate the building use 20% less water than the water use baseline calculated as follows for commercial buildings: Toilets: Urinals: Restroom faucets: 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf), except blow-out fixtures: 3.5 (gpf) 1.0 (gpf) 0.5 gallons per minute (gpm) at 60 (pSi)12 There are several strategies to meet the requirements of this prerequisite, the simplest and most appropriate for the museum will be to use and install WaterSense-certified fixtures and fixture fittings. 13 To meet the 20% efficiency mark the museum toilet must use 1.28 gpf or less and the faucet rating of 0.4 gpm at 60 psi. II U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 21. 12 Ibid., 21. 13 WaterSense is a partnership program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. A list of toilets and sinks that meet the WaterSense criteria for efficiency is available at the website http://www.epa.govlWaterSense/index.htm. 54 WE Credit 1: Water Efficient Landscaping (2-4 Points) WE Credit 1 intends to reduce the use of potable water for landscaping. Two points are awarded to projects that reduce potable water use for landscaping by at least 50%. The museum can achieve all four points by installing landscaping that does not require permanent irrigation systems and relies only on natural precipitation. Restoring the surrounding site with native plant species not only maximizes natural on-site water resources and reduces the need for potable water for irrigation but also contributes to the historicity of the site. The museum must earn at least 2 points in this category to achieve a Silver rating but four points are included in the 53 point total. This is a Design Submittal credit. WE Credit 2: Innovative Wastewater Technologies (2 Points) The intent of WE Credit 2 is to "reduce wastewater generation and potable water demand while increasing the local aquifer recharge.,,14 There are two options for achieving points in this category. Option 1 is to reduce potable water use for building sewage conveyance by 50% through the use of water-conserving fixtures (e.g., water closets, urinals) or nonpotable water (e.g., captured rainwater, recycled graywater, on-site or municipally treated wastewater). The second option requires treatment of 50% of wastewater on-site to tertiary standards. Treated water must be infiltrated or used on- site. ls 14 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 25 15 Ibid., 25. 55 Given that the museum will only have one bathroom (toilet and sink) most likely restricted for staff use only and not equipment to treat wastewater on site; option 1 and the installation of water-conserving fixtures seems the most economical for this project. The museum must use fixtures that are at least 20% more efficient to fulfill WE Prerequisite 1 and by selecting a toilet and sink with 30% more efficiency the project team can earn 2 points for this credit. An ultra low-flow toilet that uses 0.8 gpf or less and a faucet with a rating of 0.25 gpm at 60 psi would meet the 50% reduction criteria. This is a Design Submittal credit. WE Credit 3: Water Use Reduction (2-4 Points) Similar to WE Credit 2 the points for this credit are achieved by exceeding the prerequisite 20% reduction in overall water use in the building. The available points (2- 4) for WE Credit 3 are based on the percent water savings as follows: 30% percent reduction = 2 points - toilet 1.12 gpf; faucet 0.35 gpm at 60 psi 35% percent reduction = 3 points - toilet 1.04 gpf; faucet 0.325 gpm at 60 psi 40% percent reduction = 4 points - toilet 0.96 gpf; faucet 0.3 gpm at 60 psi By selecting a toilet with a 0.96 gpf or less and a faucet with a 0.3 gpm at 60 psi or less the museum can demonstrate a 40% reduction in water use and achieve 4 points. The museum rehabilitation must earn all 4 points for this credit (as well as maximum points in other credits) to reach the LEED-Gold certification level. This is a Design Submittal credit. 56 Energy and Atmosphere (EA) Credits - Overview LEED-NC 2009 Energy and Atmosphere Credits address issues related to building commissioning, refrigerant management, on-site renewable energy, measurement, verification and green power. The EA credits are fundamental to the core values of sustainable and green building design and focus on energy reduction and the use of alternative energy sources. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, homes and commercial buildings use 71 % of the electricity in the United States and this number will rise to 75% by 2025. 16 Overall, these credits seek to reduce the building's energy consumption, improve performance efficiency and assess efficacy of building operations. There are 35 points and 3 required prerequisites in the Energy and Atmosphere credit category. The museum appears to be eligible for 7 points in this category. This point total is based on a minimum design for the final museum program, however if to achieve the LEED-Go1d certification level the project must earn 9 points in this category. EA Prerequisite 1: Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems (Required) EA Prerequisite 1 requires the commissioning of a building to verify that the building's energy-related systems are installed and calibrated to perform according to the project requirements, basis of design and construction documents. A commissioning authority must be appointed to the project and it is the responsibility of the 16National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL: Buildings Research Home Page, March 10,2009, http://www.mel.gov/buildings/ (accessed May 1, 2009). 57 commissioning authority to "lead, review and oversee the completion of the commissioning process activities." 17 The commissioning authority is there to ensure the building is performing as designed and must be an individual with experience in at least two building projects. Given the size of the museum project (less than 50,000 gross square feet) the commissioning authority can be a member of the project team, i.e. Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park Maintenance Crew. There are three major components that the project team needs to develop to meet the requirements for this prerequisite. First, the project team must develop what the USGBC refers to as the Owner's Project Requirements (OPR). The OPR must be completed prior to approval of contractor submittals of any commissioned equipment or systems. The OPR must address the following as applicable to the museum project: • Owner and User Requirements - primary purpose, program, building use and pertinent history. • Environmental and Sustainability Goals • Energy Efficiency Goals • Indoor Environmental Quality Requirements • Equipment and System Expectations • Buildings Occupant and Operations and Maintenance (0 & M) Personnel Requirements 18 The second component required by this prerequisite is Basis of Design (BOD) documentation that includes the following: • Primary Design Assumptions - space use, redundancy, diversity, climatic design conditions, space zoning, occupancy, operations and space environmental requirements. 17 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 29. 18 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED-NCfor New Construction Reference Guide Version 2.2., 154-155 58 • Standards - all applicable codes, guidelines, regulations, and other references that will be followed. • Narrative Descriptions for all systems to be commissioned. 19 Thirdly, the project team must develop a Commissioning Plan that "identifies the strategies, aspects and responsibilities within the commissioning process for each phase of the project. ,,20 In June 2009, the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air- Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) will begin offering a certification exam for Commissioning Process Management Professionals (commissioning authorities). 21 Because this is the first LEED-certified rehabilitation for the KLGO park it might be cost-effective and time-efficient to contract with an experienced or ASHRAE-certified commissioning authority. This is a Construction Submittal prerequisite. EA Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance (required) The intent of this prerequisite is to "establish the minimum level of energy efficiency for the proposed building and systems to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with excessive energy use.,,22 There are three options to meet this prerequisite. Option 1 - Whole Building Energy Simulation requires a 5% improvement in the proposed building performance rating for major renovations to existing buildings, 19 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED-NCfor New Construction Reference Guide Version 2.2., 155. 20 Ibid., 156 21 The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), ASHRAE Publishes Thermal Comfort Standard, 2004, http://www.ashrae.org/pressroom/detail/13394 (accessed April 29, 2009). 22 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 31. 59 compared with the baseline building performance rating. Option 2 - Prescriptive Compliance Path is based on the ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide. This option requires the project to follow the prescriptive measures ofthe ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide appropriate to the project scope. The museum however does not appear to meet the criteria for this option as it requires the building to be a small office building, small retail building, small warehouse or self storage building. Option 3 - Prescriptive Compliance Path is based on the Advanced Buildings™ Core Performance™ Guide developed by the New Buildings Institute. 23 The project team in consultation with the commissioning agent should decide if Option I or Option 3 is the most feasible for the project. The options for this prerequisite correspond to the options under EA Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance. The available credits (1-19) associated with EA Credit 1 Option 1 are based on the percentage improvement in the proposed building performance and there are 1-3 points available for the prescriptive Option 3 path.24 This is a Design Submittal prerequisite. EA Prerequisite 3: Fundamental Refrigerant Management (Required) This prerequisite is a straightforward approach to reducing stratospheric ozone depletion from chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions. EA Prerequisite 3 requires zero use of CFC-based refrigerants in new base building heating, ventilating, air conditioning and 23 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 32. The Advanced Buildings Core Performance Guide book is available for purchase from http://www.advancedbuildings.net/corePerf.htm. 24 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 35 60 refrigeration (HVAC&R) systems.25 The new HVAC&R system for the museum program should utilize equipment that "minimizes or eliminates the emission of compounds like CFCs that contribute to ozone depletion and climate change or not include any CFC-based refrigerants. 26 Designing the final HVAC&R system in the museum without refrigerants will fulfill the requirements of this prerequisite and satisfy EA Credit 4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management and earn two points (see below) for that credit. This is a Design Submittal prerequisite. EA Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance (1-19 Points) The points available with EA Credit 1 are based on the percentage improvement in the proposed building performance. The intent of this credit is to "achieve increasing levels of energy performance beyond the prerequisite standard to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with excessive energy use.,,27 The same three options available under EA Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance are available with this credit. The option that the project team selects for EA Prerequisite 2 and the overall building performance will determine the amount of points the project receives from this credit. Option 1 has 1-19 potential points and there are 1-3 points available with Option 2. To achieve a LEED-Go1d certification the museum rehabilitation project must earn at least 2 points in this credit category. This is a Design Submittal credit. 25 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 34. 26 Ibid., 41. 27 Ibid., 35. ------------- - ------------- 61 EA Credit 3: Enhanced Commissioning (2 Points) EA Credit 3 encourages commissioning early in the design process and execution of additional activities after systems performance verification is completed.28 To earn this credit the project must have an independent contracted commissioning agent thus these two points are not available if the commissioning agent is part of the project team. However, these two points are included in the projected point totals for certification at the LEED-Silver and LEED-Gold levels. This is a Construction Submittal credit. EA Credit 4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management (2 Points) This credit corresponds with the intent of EA Prerequisite 3 to "reduce ozone depletion and support early compliance with the Montreal Protocol while minimizing direct contributions to climate change.,,29 The museum rehabilitation project can earn two points for this credit and fulfill the EA Prerequiste3 by not using any refrigerants (Option 1) in the final museum program. If refrigerants are necessary, to earn these two points, they must meet the criteria set forth in Option 2 of this credit. If the project does not use any refrigerants no analysis or calculations are required for submittal for this credit. This is a Design Submittal credit. 28 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 39. 29 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 41. The Montreal Protocol is an international treaty designed to minimize depletion of the ozone by advocating the reduction of ozone-depleting substances like CFCs. 62 EA Credit 6: Green Power (2 Points) This credit encourages the "development and use of grid-source, renewable energy technologies on a net zero pollution basis.,,3o Electricity in Skagway, AK is hydro-electric provided by Goat Lake Hydro. To earn these two points the project must document that at least 35% of the museum's electricity is coming from this hydro-electric source and not diesel generation. If this is not possible then the project team could consider purchasing renewable energy certificates (RECs), tradable renewable certificates (TRCs), green tags or other forms of green power. 31 The project must engage in a 2-year contract with these renewable energy sources. This is a Construction Submittal credit. Materials and Resources (MR) Credits - Overview LEED-NC 2009 Materials and Resources Credits encourage the sustainable practice of building material conservation. The credits in this category award points for building and material reuse, construction waste management, recycling and use of regional and rapidly renewable materials. There is one required prerequisite and 14 possible points in this category of which the museum is eligible for 7 points and potential 9 points which is necessary for the point total to achieve LEED-Gold certification. 30 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 41. 31 Ibid., 45. 63 MR Prerequisite 1: Storage and Collection of Recyclables (Required) The intent of MR Prerequisite 1 is to further the "reduction of waste generated by building occupants that is hauled to and disposed of in landfills.,,32 This prerequisite requires that an area at the project site be dedicated for the collection of recyclable materials that at minimum must include paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics and materials. This is a Design Submittal prerequisite. MR Credit 1.2: Building Reuse-Maintain Interior Nonstructural Elements (1 Point) This is one of two credits and 2-3 points in the LEED-NC 2009 rating system that specifically rewards the reuse of historicIexisting buildings. Based on the plan to replace the plank walls with stud walls the museum rehabilitation project is ineligible for the 1-3 points associated with MR Credit 1.1 Building Reuse because that credit requires a minimum reuse of 55% of existing walls, floors and the roof. However, MR. Credit 1.2 Building Reuse addresses the reuse of interior nonstructural elements such as interior walls, doors, floor coverings and ceiling systems by 50%. The project team may be able to conserve at least 50% of the museum interior and earn this point. This is a Construction Submittal credit. 32 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 47. ,....---------------_.. __. __ .. _- ---------- 64 MR Credit 2: Construction Waste Management (1-2 Points) The intent of this credit is to "divert construction and demolition debris disposal in landfills and incineration facilities" and requires the recycling of 50% or 75% of qualified materials. 33 To meet this requirement the project team must develop and implement a construction waste management plan that identifies materials to be recycled and how these materials will be recycled. Recyclable materials include cardboard, metal, brick, mineral fiber panel, concrete, plastic, clean wood, glass, gypsum wallboard, carpet and insulation. Not all of these materials are present in the museum and given the poor condition of many of the materials to be removed and not reused in the museum rehabilitation, the project may not meet the minimum 50% requirement for this credit. Excluded from the recycled percentage is excavated soil and land-clearing debris. Volume or weight calculations of recycled materials will meet the requirements of this credit. To achieve a LEED-Gold certification the museum rehabilitation must demonstrate a 75% recycling rate and earn the corresponding 2 points for this credit. This is a Construction Submittal. MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse (1-2 Points) This credit encourages the use of salvaged, refurbished or reused materials to "reduce demand for virgin materials and reduce waste, thereby lessening impacts associated with the extraction and processing of virgin resources.,,34 Points for this credit 33 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 50. 34 Ibid., 51. ----------------_._---- 65 are awarded based on the value of total material cost spent on non-virgin materials. The project earns 1 point for 5% and 2 points for 10% of the total value of material costs coming from non-virgin sources. Materials excluded from these calculations are mechanical, electrical and plumbing components. Furniture is allowable if it is also included in calculations for subsequent MR Credits 4-7. Note that materials qualifying for this credit cannot be applied to the other MR credits related to building reuse and recycled materials. The project team should designate particular buildings elements for each of the desired MR credits and eliminate overlap. The museum rehabilitation project must earn 2 points in this category to achieve a LEED-Gold certification and at least 1 point for LEED-Silver. This is a Construction Submittal credit. MR Credit 4: Recycled Content (1-2 Points) To increase demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials LEED-NC 2009 awards 1-2 points for projects that meet the requirements of this credit.35 A percentage of recycled content of the total value of the materials of the project determine points for this credit. The project earns 1 point for 10% recycled content and 2 points for 20% recycled content. To calculate the projects percent recycled content use the following formulas: Recycled Content Value ($) = (% post-consumer recycled contact x material cost) + 0.5 x (% pre-consumer recycled content x material cost) Percent Recycled Content Total Recycled Content Value ($) -:- Total Materials Cost ($) 35 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 52. 66 Examples of materials often made from recycled materials include steel, gypsum board, carpet and ceramic tiles. Materials excluded from these calculations are mechanical, electrical and plumbing components. The museum rehabilitation project must earn 2 points in this category to achieve a LEEO-Go1d certification and at least 1 point for LEED-Si1ver. This is a Construction Submittal credit. MR Credit 5: Regional Materials (1-2 Points) MR Credit 5 awards 1-2 points to projects that utilize materials available within 500 miles of the project site. The intent of this credit is to "increase demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured within the region, thereby supporting the use of indigenous resources and reducing the environmental impacts resulting from transportation.,,36 To earn 1 point the project team must calculate that a minimum of 10% of total value of materials cost was extracted, harvested, recovered or manufactured within the 500 mile radius. To earn 2 points the percentage must be at least 20% total value of materials cost. Given the location of Skagway and the restrictions of the Buy American Act, points under this credit might be difficult to achieve ifnot impossib1e.37 Figure 4 depicts a 500 mile radius around Skagway and shows that Juneau and Haines are included in this area. Excluded are Anchorage, AK and Seattle, 36 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 53. 37 "The Buy American Act of 1933 was passed to ensure that the federal government supports domestic companies and domestic workers by buying goods manufactured in the United States that are made from materials mined or produced in the United States. The law provides exceptions for items not commercially available in the United States or if the price is more than 6 percent higher than comparable foreign products. It also allows exceptions for purchases under $100,000 or by department head waiver." Fred B. Sollish, CPM and John Semanik, CPM, The Procurement and Supply Manager's Desk Reference (Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2007), 52 67 WA. When possible the project team should use materials manufactured or extracted in Juneau or Haines before ordering from Seattle, WA, such as lumber. The museum rehabilitation project must earn 2 points in this category to achieve a LEED-Gold certification and at least I point for LEED-Silver. This is a Construction Submittal credit. MR Credit 6: Rapidly Renewable Materials (1 Point) This credit encourages the use of rapidly renewable materials (plants harvested within a lO-year or shorter cycle) to "reduce the use and depletion of finite raw materials and long-cycle renewable materials.,,38 To earn this I point the project must use rapidly renewable materials for at least 2.5% of the total value cost of all building materials. Examples of rapidly renewable materials include bamboo, wool, cotton insulation, agrifiber, linoleum, wheatboard, strawboard, sunflowerboard and cork. There are many commercial insulation products that are made from rapidly renewable materials like Icynene and Soy Foam. Both are spray-in insulations that meet the requirements of this credit, enhance building energy performance (EA credits) and improve indoor air quality (Indoor Environmental Quality - IEQ credits) through 10w-YOCs. The project team should consider using rapidly renewable composite board products for exhibit display modules or wall paneling inside the museum when original material cannot be repaired and reused. The monetary and environmental cost of acquiring some of these materials may outweigh their benefit and the overall sustainability goals of the project. However, 38 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009/or New Construction and Major Renovations, 54. 68 this point is included in the total to achieve LEED-Silver and LEED-Gold certification. This is a Construction Submittal credit. MR Credit 7: Certified Wood (1 Point) MR Credit 7 "encourages environmentally responsible forest management" by specifying that projects receiving 1 point in this category use a minimum of 50% (based on cost) of wood-based materials and products that are certified in accordance with the Forest Stewardship Council's principles and criteria, for wood building components.,,39 The project team can include all structural framing, general dimensional framing, flooring, sub-flooring, wood doors, finishes and temporary formwork and bracing for the museum rehabilitation. This is a Construction Submittal credit. Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) Credits - Overview LEED-NC 2009 Indoor Environmental Quality Credits seek to improve indoor air quality. The EPA specifies two types of indoor air pollutants; particulate matter like dust, smoke, pollen, tobacco smoke, mites, molds, bacteria and viruses; and gaseous pollutants from combustion processes and building materials like adhesives, paints, varnishes, cleaning products and pesticides.40 The credits in this category address building ventilation and require the use of low-emitting materials, encourage chemical and 39 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major Renovations, 55. 40 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Guide to Air Cleaners in the Home, Publications, Indoor Air, Air, US EPA, November 14,2001, http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/airc1ean.html#Indoor%20Air%20Pollutants (accessed April 30 2009). 69 pollutant control, and advocate occupant controllability of lighting and thermal comfort. There are two required prerequisites and 15 potential points in the Indoor Environmental Quality Credit category of which the museum appears to be eligible for at least 11 points. ~ltall t- o I..Tl hill' )11 ',1(,,11 111 Figure 4. Regional Materials - 500 mile radius around Skagway, Alaska. IEQ Prerequisite 1: Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance (Required) This prerequisite requires the project team to "establish minimum indoor air quality (lAQ) performance to enhance indoor air quality in building, thus contributing to 70 the comfort and well-being of the occupants.,,41 The museum will be a mechanically ventilated building to meet curatorial museum standards and as such must comply with Sections 4 through 7 of ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality (with errata but without addenda) to fulfill this prerequisite. The mechanical ventilation systems must be designed using the ventilation rate procedure or the applicable local code, whichever is more stringent. This is a Design Submittal prerequisite. IEQ Prerequisite 2: Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control (Required) IEQ Prerequisite 2 addresses indoor air quality through the management of tobacco smoke that is classified by the EPA as both particulate matter and a gaseous pollutant. There are two applicable options for meeting the requirements of this prerequisite and the museum easily complies with option 1 that prohibits smoking in the building. This option allows the project team to designate an exterior smoking area at least 25 feet away from the building. All National Park Service facilities are smoke-free. This is a Design Submittal prerequisite. IEQ Credit 1: Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring (l Point) The intent of IEQ Credit 1 is to "provide capacity for ventilation system monitoring to help promote occupant comfort and well-being.,,42 This credit requires the installation of permanent monitoring systems for airflow and carbon dioxide levels. The 41 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 57. 42 Ibid., 60. 71 systems must have an alert should airflow or carbon dioxide levels vary by 10% or more than designed values. This alert must trigger an automated system that adjusts airflow appropriately or notify building personnel to take action. This is a Design Submittal credit. IEQ Credit 2: Increased Ventilation (1 Point) The intent of this credit is to "provide building occupants with superior indoor air quality by providing adequate ventilation rates." Mechanically ventilated spaces must increase breathing zone outdoor air ventilation rates to all occupied spaces by at least 30% above the minimum rates as determined by IEQ Prerequisite 1: Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance. 43 This is a Design Submittal credit. IEQ Credit 3.1: Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan-During Construction (1 Point) The Indoor Environmental Quality Credits address air quality during construction, pre-occupancy and occupancy. IEQ Credits 3.1 and 3.2 specifically "promote the comfort and well-being of construction workers and building occupants" in the construction and pre-occupancy phases.44 To earn this 1 point under the IEQ Credit 3.1 the project team must develop and implement an indoor air quality (IAQ) management plan that meets the recommended control measures of the Sheet Metal and Air 43 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED-NCfor New Construction Reference Guide Version 2.2., 309. 44 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 63. 72 Conditioning National Contractors Association (SMACNA) IAQ Guidelines For Occupied Buildings Under Construction, 2nd Edition 2007; protects stored on-site and installed absorptive materials from moisture damage; and replace filters of any permanently installed air handlers used during construction immediately prior to occupancy.45 This is a Construction Submittal credit. IEQ Credit 3.2: Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan-Before Occupancy (1 Point) The intent ofIEQ Credit 3.2 is the same as IEQ 3.1 to eliminate IAQ problems that occur as a result of construction and there are two options to meet the requirements of this credit. Option 1 is a total building flush-out and option 2 requires air testing prior to occupancy. Either option is applicable to the museum rehabilitation project. Air testing must measure the following contaminants and not exceed the corresponding concentrations (see Table 1): Table 1. Contaminant Concentration Limits for Indoor Air Quality Testing. Contaminant Limit Formaldehyde 27 parts per billion Particulates (PMIO) 50 micrograms per cubic meter Total volatile organic compounds (TVOCs) 500 micrograms per cubic meter 4-Phenylcyclohexene (4-PCH) 6.5 micrograms per cubic meter(only required if carpets and fabrics with styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) latex backing are installed as part of the base building systems) 9 part per million and no Carbon monoxide (CO) greater than 2 parts per million above outdoor levels Source: U.S. Green BUlldmg CouncIl, LEED 2009 for New ConstructIOn and M{4or RenovatIOns, 63. 45 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 63 73 The air testing must be conducted prior to occupancy when all construction and finishes are complete. The test must occur during normal operating hour and under normal operating conditions with testing sensors located 3 to 6 feet of the floor (occupant breathing zone) and run for at least 4 hours. This is a Construction Submittal credit. IEQ Credit 4.1 through 4.4 - Overview The intent of IEQ Credits 4.1 through 4.4 is to "reduce the quantity of indoor air contaminants that are odorous, irritating and/or harmful to the comfort and well-being of installers and occupants.,,46 Each credit is worth one point and addresses particular sources of gaseous air pollutants. The project team must maintain and submit a list of all low-emitting materials. This list must include at minimum the manufacturer's name, product name, specific VOC (Volatile Organic Compound) data for each product and the corresponding VOC limit per the related IEQ credit. IEQ Credit 4.1: Low-Emitting Materials-Adhesives and Sealants (1 Point) To earn this credit all adhesives and sealants used in the interior of the building must comply with the low-VOC standards in Table 2.47 IEQ Credit 4.2: Low-Emitting Materials-Paints and Coatings (1 Point) 46 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 66. 47 Ibid., 67 74 This credit relates to all interior architectural paints and coatings; anti-corrosive and anti-rust paints applied to ferrous metals; and clear wood finishes, floor coatings, stains, primers and shellacs. All paint and coatings used in the museum must meet these VOCs limits in Table 3. The Coatings Research Group, Incorporated (CRGI) is an active member of the USGBC and maintains a Green Wise list of certified paints, primers, coatings and finishes that meet or exceed these LEED standards. Included in this list (www.greenwisepaint.com) are several low-odor, zero-VOC emitting paints including the Southern Diversified Products American Pride and Mythic paints.48 This is a Construction Submittal credit. Table 2. VOC Limits for Adhesives and Sealants Architectural Applications VOC Limit Specialty Applications VOC Limit Indoor carpet adhesives 50 PVC welding 510 Carpet pad adhesives 50 CPVC welding 490 Wood flooring adhesives 100 ABS welding 325 Rubber floor adhesives 60 Plastic cement welding 250 Subfloor adhesives 50 Adhesive primer for plastic 550 Ceramic tile adhesives 65 Contact adhesive 80 VCT and asphalt adhesives 50 Special purpose contact 250 Drywall and panel adhesives 50 Structural wood member 140 Cove base adhesives 50 Sheet applied rubber lining 850 Multipurpose construction 70 Top and trim adhesive 250 Structural glazing adhesives 100 Substrate Specific Sealants Metal to metal 30 Architectural 250 Plastic foams 50 Nonmembrane roof 300 Porous material (except 50 Roadway 250 Wood 30 Single-ply roof membrane 450 Fiberglass 80 Other 420 l 48 Coatings Research Group, Incorporated, Green Wise Paint. 2008, http://www.greenwisepaint.com/certified-products.aspx#inttop5 (accessed May 2, 2009). -------------------- ---_..._. 75 Table 2. (continued) Sealant Primers VOC Limit Aerosol Adhesives49 I VOC Limit Architectural, nonporous 250 General pwpose mist spray 65% VOCs by weight . - Architectural, porous 775 General purpose web spray 55% VOCs by weight Other 750 Special purpose aerosol 70% VOCsby adhesives (all types) weight Source: u.S. Green Bmldmg CouncIl, LEED 2009for New Construction and Major RenovatIOns, 66. Table 3. VOC Limits for Paints and Coatings -----------, A ,0 VOC Limit : "10 (gIL less water) Interior Coating ~TJ" 1::'1. 150 Interior Coating Flat 50 A & Anti-rust Paints51 Gloss 250 Semi-Gloss 250 Flat 250 Wood Finishes, r, .~~:~~~ Stains, Primers, Shellacs Bond Breakers 350 Clear Wood, HH~'''''~ 350 Varnish 550 Sanding Sealers 550 Lacquer 550 Clear :Lacquer 680 r, _rllrina 350 Dry-Fog .", mao 400 Fi,,,-, 'VVHH5 Exterior 350 Fire-Retardant Coatings - Clear 650 Fire-Retardant Coatings -- Pigmented 350 49 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 67. Aerosol Adhesives must comply with Green Seal Standard for Commercial Adhesives GS-36 requirements in effect on October 19,2000. 50 Green Seal, GS-ll Green Seal™ Environmental Standardfor Paints, May 20, 1993, http://www.greenseal.orglcertification/standards/paints_GS_11.pdf (accessed April 29, 2009). 51 Green Seal, GC-3 Green Seal™ Environmental Criteria for Anti-Corrosive Paints, January 7, 1997, http://www.greenseal.org/certification/standards/anti-corrosivepaints.pdf (accessed April 29, 2009). Table 3. (continued) 76 I IWood Finishes, Coatings, Stains, Primers, Shellacs (continued) VOC Limit(gIL less wat~r) Flats 100 Floor 100 Graphic Arts (Sign) 500 Japans/Faux Finishing Coatings 350 _ ..•_-----_.. ...- -~.._-_.._-----_......_- . ------ .-....._._._._--_.- Cement 450 ...........-._...__...---...- Mastic 300 •...._-~._- M"T~ . 500 .__._---~- Multi-Color rMt;n30% oftotal . site area i Red-;ce b- 45% --------.- EA Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance ! Improve by 46% for Existingi Building Renovations EA Credit 3: Enhanced Commissionin I Com lete I EA Credit 6: Green Power 100% MR Credit 2: Construction Wa_st_e_M_a_n_a,...ge_m_en_t_. -+'_9_5_o/<_o_R_e~cy'__c_le_d_o_r_S_a_lv_a~ge.d__-1 I MR Credi!.-~}v1aterialsReuse ii-R_eu_s_e_l_5_%c-- ---i I MR Credit 4: Recycled Content__________ ' 30% of Content MR Credit 5: Regi~~l M. ......:.:a_te~ri.:.ca=ls________ i 30% of Materials _J\1R Credit 6: Rapidly Renewable Materials . =--r5-~i;---------- ~-- MR Credit 7: Certified Wood I 95% 60 U.S. Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, 84. ------------------------ 81 Regional Priority (RP) Credits - Overview The Regional Priority Credits ofLEED-NC 2009 are a new addition to the 10- year old LEED rating system and are meant to address and acknowledge specific regional environmental issues. These are existing LEED-NC 2009 Credits selected by USGBC regional chapters and affiliates where projects earning points under these credits can earn bonus Regional Priority points. Each LEED-NC 2009 project can earn up to 4 bonus points from 6 credits in this category. The USGBC website maintains a database of all Regional Priority Credits based on location. RP Credit 1: Regional Priority (1-4 Points) The Regional Priority Credits for Alaska are as follows: WE Credit 3: Water Use Reductions by 30% EA Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance with an improvement by 12% for New Buildings or 8% for Existing Building Renovations EA Credit 2: On-Site Renewable Energy at 1% MR Credit 2: Construction Waste Management - 50% Recycled of Salvaged MR Credit 3: MaterialsReuse - 5% MR Credit 5: Regional Materials - 10% The proposed LEED-NC 2009 plan for the rehabilitation of the museum includes all of these RP credits save EA Credit 2. The museum rehabilitation project should be able to earn all 4 Regional Priority Credit points 82 Projected LEED-NC Certification Based on these LEED-NC credits a rehabilitated Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum appears eligible for at least 53 points and a LEED-Silver certification. This total does not include any of the 4 potential points for Innovation in Design. The museum has the potential to achieve a LEED-Gold certification with 60 points by earning the maximum points in all applicable LEED-NC credits and at least 2 points for EA Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance. A comparison of points required for LEED-Silver and LEED-Gold certification for the museum is shown in Table 5. Table 5. LEED-NC Certification Estimates for The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum Credit 4.2 1 Credit 4.3 3 2 2 Credit 4.4 2 I I Credit 5.1 1 I I Credit 5.2 1 Credit 6.1 1 Credit 6.2 1 Credit 7.1 1 Credit 7.2 1 Credit 8 1 Re Water Use Reduction Water Efficient Landsca in Reduce b 50% 4 4 No Potable Water Use or Irrigation Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technolo ies Credit 3 Water Use Reduction 2 Reduce b 30% Reduce by 35% 4 Reduce b 40% 83 Table 5. (continued) 7 8 2 ..~egllh:~Il... ..~~quired~E~E~gL ... _!'!IIlllaIll~nt~I<::~nlIllissioniIlgo f.B uildingE:Ilergy Sy~t.eIll~~egll!!:~Il.. J~~gll!rell.... ~~qlli~~c1~.r~r~q~..J\:!iIliIllllIllE:n..e!gYl~~r.ro~Il1l!.n~e ...~ . ~~911ire.d. ._~~gllire.d__.~~911i!:e.cl :r.rereq_~__Xll!lclllIl1eIl!al_~ef.riger.aIl.tIVlanageIlleIlt .__ .. ..._~e911ir~d_ __ .<.::rec!it 1 ...Q~tiIlli~...E:nergy}>~rfo!111.al1ce.._ . .. ' ...__ -.!J0!2....... ... .. _._ ..I.J11l'E0'ye.~y}~'t()!()E1'Je\\'I31dKsor§'to. foEI<:x..istingI31~g.s__. . L __ . ............~2~ _ __ ~.J11I)E() 'V~.bX 11'±4.~%,f1!(0)Er}N~le~.'w..1J:BldgsorIQ~forI<:xisting Bldg~_._ ._-:2 . 16% for New or I2'7(,foEI<:x.istinKI3I~gs .J.. __ . .........-.-- - -.. ' _ __ ·.···.·1-m-_·_'p.··r-o-:y·.-~'·-b"L =1·8'··o··~·····f1·····_()·=··=.E· ·1'J·=·····e:··vv··-. "'I3···I'·d··'g"s ··o···!.. L4~f() r.I<:x.istiIlg I31dg~ 4 _._..__._ _ _..~"c'JI:"\J'~.':'..~.l :2,~01.%/'f()ENeWI31dgs.or I6'to f()EI<:)(i~~iIl.g_I3I~gs.. ...5:............ I ..__.__._... .JI11P.E~Yt::~Y~~~foI1'Jt::\\' 131~g~()rI8~f()rI<:_xi~~i.l1g.I3Idgs..__ ..... .~_ ... .,"., I.I11.PE()Y~.I2x1:4:~f()E1'J.e.vv131dgsor.~.9.~for EX~!i.l1g ..I31dg~ __ ._.. 7 .. ,.., ....._..~ I...ITlP!.2.~.1J.x.~~_'to ..f()E N~I3!d,g~()E22% for_Exi.s_~il1,g. Bldgs __. __~ 8 . . ~_,.. . ..__ ......!I11l't:()'1~_~y~?.'t"--f().r..1'JewBl~g~ ()E.~<1:'to.f()r..Exi.~!il1g!~l.~gs.. ~.. 9 ...... __ .....lITlpr()'1~~x}g'to ...for1'Je\\'I~I~gsor~9'to for.I<:x.istil1gJ3.1~g~ .__.. I0 ..._..__lI11PEove~y}~'to.for 1'JewJ31d.gs()E~§Xof()rI<:.xistingI31~g~ __ . II .. ll11pr()v~_by 3:4:~.f()r1'J e\\'_I3}~g~ .or.3.9~!()EI<:)Ci~til1g13l~~ ..___ I2 ... I.l11pr_().Y~~x36'7(, ..ior1'J~.vv13I~g~()E} 2%!oLI<:.)Cis~i.IlgJ3ld~ . 13 .. 1I11pr().Y~~x}§ %f()r1'Je':"..I3I~g~gr_~:±o/"-foE.I<:JCi.~!iIlKI31~gs 14 . Il11pr()v.:~~)' ..4g%for~e':"_I3I~s.0IJ6% forI<:.xistil1~J~~_ ... .. 15 42% for New Bl~g~..()r38'7(,f()rI<:.)(ist.il1g I31_d.gs....._._ 16 for Ne':".I3}~g~_()E.:±Q'tllf()rI<:)(i~t.iIlgI3Ld.gs ... ~... 17 . Illl'pr0'l.ebY<1:~'to forJ'~t::':"Bl~~()r:±~~!()EI<:_xi~!il1gI3ld.gs . __ ._ . 1 1I11proveby ~iS.~±.foE N'~,:"B}d.gsgr<1::4:.'to±.for I<:x.i~til1gI31~g~_ _ ....•1:.:9._=...-/ 1_ _ __. __ _ C•. redit 2Qn-~it~gene\VableE:lle~gy... 1 l~~~.l1~\\'~~le.I<:nergy. 3% Renewable 2 2 2 3 4 5 611'tol3.~I1~yvil~1~. I<:l1ergy.__ ..--.: __ ....__ ...:.R....e...n...... e..wa.1J1~El1ergY 3 ..E:I1~lll1c.~.c1<::()mIll!~si()nil1g_ Credit 4 E.Il~al1c.~Il__~~rige..rlll1!.J\:!lll1ag~Ill~.Il!.. Credit 5 Measurement and Verification ~... ~•._" ~.~~ ~ "-~,._~.~.~--."._..~._ .._..~..._..~~, ..~._ ...~~ Credit 6 Green Power2 2 2 2 __ .?'7(,~e_Ile..\\'~~I.e_EnergL_ .. 1._ -... __ . - l3.~~\\'~~I~I<:l1~EgY - - . 2 2 lto2 I 2 117 __~eqllired. Prereq l§toEll,g~IlI1Il.<::~lle~ti~nof~~~y~~Il!J~es.__ _____~~~911ir~ Credit 1.1 BlIilclil1gB.ellse~M~il1~ajl1I<:)CistiI1gW.all8.!Il()()rs.al1~~o •. o:cfe I=..,c"'.:""l Reuse 55% I Reuse 2 .-- . Reuse 95% 3 1 ...=__._ .....__ ... L__ ~Cr~~.it!:2~~jIil~ing~tlu~~-:.11ail1tain Interior N01~n~slt~ru~c~tu~ri[a111 ~I~~~~it~=: :~--=--=Il:~-- •.=l ....__._~,<::r~4it..2._S~nstruction)VasteJ\:!anag~nlent __ .5Q'7(,~~cycle4()rSalvaged ... 2=... ~..~.. 75%l3.~cycled or~alvag~4 Credit 3 Materials Reuse Reuse 5% Reuse I 2 Credit 4 Credit 5 .}~egion..ll1.J\:!at.e~ia!s 10% of Materials -- _ -- _.- 2 2 1 2 84 Table 5. (continued) 1 1 1 11 11 11 ~eguired .. ~eguiE~~. ~~g\lire~. ~~gui!~.~ 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 • ___M!lli,!!um Indoori\.irQua~ty'p~!f()E,!!an£e_ _ __ __ . ~equ}!~.~. _¥!1yir.()Il'!!~Il!llL!ol>.ll.l:c_o_~ID_()k~(~!~L~ontrol._ . ._~ .._~~gl!i!~_~__ g_u!~()()r~_!!pe!i~~LM()Il!!()rillg. .. Increased Ventilation "_ .'.• _ ..•. _ •••••••. __ ~u · •• __,_._. ._._•• _ ••_.,. __ , ~~__ .__._~. _,.__ Credit 3.1 Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan - Construction •.............. .. - :: Credit 3.2 Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan - Before ()C~ll)J~Il~Y.. ___.~._~_~__ . _.. _ 1 Credit 4.1 Low-Emitting Materials - Adhesives and Sealants 1 1 Credit 4.2-i·ow=:EDrltting Materiais=P·~intsandCo~ti~·gs-' 1 1 Credit 4.3 . t_oiV--~iJli{tIlliM!t~~il!!~:=_·~199£E1~~$¥stellis··· __ ·---1 _~~_~__~~. !.. __~..':e.9:it_~:~._.:r...o~:-_EJ!1it!!.ng Mater.ials :_~()plE()si!e_~.2()~§ci\:gri[tQ~~~_ 1 Credit 5 Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control 1 ----·-----------~~-·c:~~1!~C~~_()Ilt!~!!~~iIi~i~f$yste:.n1s=:~ig~t[~L_.__ 1 .. _ _._C::::r.e~:d::-:cit:.6.2 ~_()n!r()!I!'.\J!lityof.sys~ms - Thennal Comfort 1 Credit 7.1 Thermal Comfort - 1 ·~c··'·········-·· ···C······r·e····dit 7.2 Thermal Comfort - Verification 1 .... .!?!'y_l!gl1!!'I1~ Yiews:I>ayli_g~t . ~___.__ . .._~ ._ 1 Credit 8.2 Daylight and Views - Views 1 1 1 Credit 1 in Credit 2 ___________ ... 1!11l():vati()'Il.()~~~el11)Jl11ry.1'~rfor.l11.i!l~~e_ I.nl10'lati()ll_()r Ej(em)Jl11ry!,.(:rf()rplallce !nn()yati().Il_~.§.~el11plllryY~rK()~l11llIlC~ Innovat,io.:.n::. _._ .. _ _._.__ __ ._. Innovation LliED®Ac:c·-r·e·d··:i···te···d':·-.:.P··r-·o·····C:e···s's-i-o'-n'-a-1·'· - . 1 .~ ""---,. ---_.._---"" 1 1 4 4 REGIOl';lAL PRIOIUTY . Ptml~ . Credit 1 ~~gi()Il11I!'riori!L 1 to 4 . ~egionally_I>(:fined Cre.cli!_6chi~y~ ._._,~ ~_______ 1 ... ,~ ~~.l{_(:gi()n.llllYI>efiI!~c!~~.'!i!A~hi(:yed ~~_____ ____~. 1 .....l{egi()l1.1111Y_I>efined_~redit Achieved 1 Re ionall Defined Credit Achieved 1 85 CHAPTER IV ANAYLSIS AND CONCLUSION Analysis In the past two years there have been several inquiries into the compatibility of the LEED-NC rating system and historic rehabilitation projects. In 2007, Patrice Frey at the University of Pennsylvania published a thesis title Measuring Up: The Performance ofHistoric Buildings Under the LEED-NC Green Building Rating System, and found that historic buildings performed "stronger than expected."] She analyzed each credit category in LEED-NC versions 2.0 and 2.1 and assessed how a historic building might perform under each category as compared with a newly constructed building. She assigned a historic building performance rating of strong, average or weak for each LEED-NC credit. In general, she was considering the performance of historic buildings that are much larger, more complex and urban than the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum. For her case study she used the II-story Cobb Building, 1910, in downtown Seattle, Washington; the 2-story Italianate Renaissance Revival-style Robert H. Smith Visitor Education Center (VEC) at President Lincoln's Cottage, 1905, in Washington, D.C.; and Trinity Church, 1877, in Boston, Massachusetts. The Cobb Building is certified LEED- Silver and the Lincoln Cottage was recently certified LEED-Gold. The restoration of 1 Frey, Patrice J, "Measuring Up: The Performance of Historic Buildings Under the LEED-NC Green Building Rating System" (master's thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 2007), 155. 86 Trinity Church incorporated sustainable practices but the project team did not seek LEED certification. In 2008, Gisele Taylor Wells at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro furthered the work of Frey with her thesis, The Greening ofHistoric Places: Finding Common Ground Between Historic Tax Credits and LEED Certification? The goal of Wells' study was to "determine if commonalities existed between [her case study buildings] that successfully combined LEED certification and federal preservation tax credits.',3 She used the federal preservation tax credits as a measure of whether or not the rehabilitated buildings met the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings - something a preservationist would consider a successful rehabilitation. Again the buildings that Wells used for her research were not of the same scale as the museum. In addition to the Cobb Building from Frey's research, Wells included the following buildings listed in Table 1. 4 Evident from this list is that the buildings Wells included in her study were in urban settings, approximately 20,000 sq. ft. or larger, and constructed from materials not common to the museum or other historic vernacular buildings in Skagway, AK. The findings from the Frey and Wells studies are compiled in Table 2 along with the proposed LEED-NC Silver plan for the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum. 2 Wells, Gisele Taylor, "The Greening of Historic Places: Finding Common Ground Between Historic Tax Credits and LEED Certification" (master's. thesis, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 2008). 3 Ibid, 53. 4 Ibid, 46, 61,115. Table 1. Wells 2008 Case Study Historic LEED-Certified Buildings. 87 Original Total LEED-NCBuilding Construction Square CertificationMaterial Foota2e Balfour-Guthrie, 1913, Portland, OR Reinforced 19,500 Silver concrete The Annory/Gerding Theater, 1891, Portland, OR Brick and stone 52,000 Platinum Scowcroft Building, 1906, Ogden, UT Brick and heavy 133,000 Silver timber WP Fuller Paints/Big-D Construction, 1922, Salt Lake Reinforced 67,900 GoldCity, UT concrete/ block The Cobb Building, 1910, Seattle, WA Steel frame and 128,930 Silver masonry Brick, steel Martineau Project, 1905, 1920, Grand Rapids, MI frame with 47,932 Certified masonry and frame Bazzanni Associates Headquarters, 1901, 1908, Grand Brick, reinforced concrete, block 37,749 SilverRapids, MI and frame Kelsey Project Avenue for Arts, 1912, 1914, Grand Brick, block, 21,402 CertifiedRapids, MI frame Moseley architects New Headquarters, 1938, Brick 170,000 GoldRichmond, VA 109-119 Whitaker Street Project, 1890, Savannah, GA Brick 10,800 Silver Table 2. Comparison of proposed LEED-NC Silver certification plan for the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum with Wells and Frey. 88 Jeff. Wells Smith's Study Frey Study LEED-NC Parlor No. of Performance LEED-NC 2009 v2.2 Museum Historic ProbabilityProjected Bldgs Historic BldgsEquivalent LEED- Earning vs. New NC Silver LEED Construction .-. -- ---- -_ ..-_._._._---~- -_.._----.~ ...--_.-..-_ ...• -•.._-~ 2009 Pts (10 total) ··S~stainable Sites Construction Activity Pollution :Prereq 1 Required . Credit 1 Site 1 10 Strong Credit 2 Development Density and Community 5 5 Strong : Credit 3 · 6 St~~;lg Credit 4.1 ~..~....... ,~ Transportation - Public 6 · 9 Average - .-._~.- Transportation Access Strong Credit 4.2 -Alternative Transportation - Bicycle 9 Average -Storage and Rooms Strong Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation - Low- 3 Average - and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles ............ Credit 4.4 r>."~' ...... ,~ •• - Parking 2 10 Average - •.. - CapacIty - Site Development - Protect or Restore - Habitat 1 0 Weak Credit 5.2 Site - Maximize Open 1 1 Weak ......... ......... Cred 6.1 >3.U' ... .,. ..."'. veslgn - Control 3 Weak Cred .6.2 veslgn - Quality Control 2 Weak Cred 7.1 Heat Island Effect - Nonroof 5 Weak Credit 7.2 Heat Island Effect - Roof 8 Weak Credit 8 LIgnt 1 6 Ii ""NIT" Water Prereq 1 Water Use ........1.-. Credit 1 Water Efficient T Reduce by 50% 9 Ii ""NIT" No Potable Water Use or -- 4 5 Average Credit 2 • 1 Average Credit 3 Water Use Ii ""NIT" Reduce by 920% Reduce by 30% Reduce by 630% Reduce by 35% · Reduce by 40% 4 ...... Table 2. (continued) 89 Jeff. Smith's LEED-NC Parlor Wells Frey StudyLEED-NC 2009 v2.2 Museum Study Equivalent LEED- NC Silver Enerl!Y & Prereq 1 Fundamental Commissioning of Building Re~uireEnerev Prereq Energy Performance Required Prereq 3 Fundamental Refrigerant Management Re~uire Credit 1 ,Energy. Weak Improve by 12% for New Bldgs or 8% for Existing 14% for New Bldgs or 10% for Existing Bldg 16% for N~;Bid/;~~-i2%-f~rExisti~gBidg- 3 """-'" 18% for New Bldgs or 14% for Existing Bldg 20% for New Bldgs or 16% for Existing Bldg 22% for New Bldgs or 18% for bXlstmg tlldg 24% for New Bldgs or 20% for bXlstmg mag 26% for New Bldgs or 22% for 28% for New BIdgs or 24% for F",.tm, KI I" 300/0 for New Bldgs or 260/0 for -""" ",- "" 32% for New Bldgs or 280/0 for 34% for New Bldgs or 30% for F",.tmo Kill 36% for New Bldgs or 32% for 38% tor New mags or 34% for 40% tor New tlldgs or 360/0 for 40%/30% 5 !.- 42% for New Bldgs or 38% for F",.tm" Kill """, 44% tor New tllags or 400/0 for 46% for New Bldgs or 42% for F,x,.tmrr Kid 48%+ for New Bldgs or 44%+ for bXlstmg tlldg 50%/40% 1 60%/50% 0 Credit 2 On-Site Enerev 1% .Energy 3% ,Energy 5% ,Energy 0 Weak f---- Energy 9% Fm,."" 11% .Energy 10% 0 Weak 13% ' Energy 15% Renew 0 Weak Credit 3 2 4 Ii "PNITP Credit 4 .~ 2 7 Average Credit 5 and 3 Ii vpr""p Credit 6 Green Power 2 3 Iivpr"ITP "., Table 2. (continued) 90 Jeff. Smith's LEED-NC Parlor Wells Frey StudyLEED-NC 2009 v2.2 Museum Study Equivalent LEED- NC Silver i& Prereq 1 Storal!:e and r. of Credit Reuse - Maintain Existing Walls,Floors and Roof Reuse 55% Maintain 75% 75% of 10 StrongExisting Shell 100% of 95% Existing 4 Strong Shell & 50% non-Shell Credit Reuse - Interior 1 StrongElements Credit 2 CIJIl.U Uo,.':.': ~. _ L _ +._ + ::6:: ~ + ::c=:..::];2.. .. Low-Emitting Materials - Paints and ()~1mo~ Innovation or Exemplary Performance Innovation or IJ.ln~~llti0J.lin Design Innovation or Performance T Materials - Adhesives and SealantsCredit 4.1 Credit 4.2 Credit 4.3 :"otP~o Materials - r lOOrIng Credit 4.4 Low-Emitting Materials - Composite Wood and ,roL Products Credit 8.2 Cree it 7.1 Cree it 7.2 Cree it 8.1 Credit 1 Credit 5 Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source 5 • C"dit 6.1 I~:;~::;~~~;~ :~~~t~~'"~~~~i:~~~.~··.·+ ,,_,," __.._..~_ _._4'''''''''''+'''''c':::::'=:':''''.''''_'i r'. d' 6 2 Controllability of Systems _Thermal \..ore It. Comfort Credit 2 ........... 92 Based on this comparison, the proposed LEED-NC Silver plan for the museum appears to be in agreement with other certified historic rehabilitation projects despite the differences in building type and location. In some instances, changes in the new LEED- NC 2009 rating system from the older versions used by Frey and Wells appear to benefit the museum project such as additional points for more water reduction (WE Credit 3) and the Regional Priority Credits. In other credit areas the comparison is mixed. For example, under Materials & Resources, Credit 1 included both exterior and interior building reuse in previous versions but is now divided into two credits; MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse - Maintain Existing Walls, Floors and Roof and MR Credit 1.2: Building Reuse - Maintain Interior Nonstructural Elements in LEED-NC 2009. The museum is most likely not eligible for MR Credit 1.1. The plan to deconstruct the original plank- constructed walls and sandwich in stud walls limit the project from earning points for MR Credit 1.1. However, if enough interior structures and elements are preserved, points under MR Credit 1.2 are still possible. The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum, like other historic rehabilitated buildings, could earn many points in the Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Materials and Resources and Indoor Environmental Quality credit categories (see Figure 1). 93 ---------------_.- • LEED-NC Silver Regional Priority Indoor Environmental Quality Sustainable Sites Water Efficiency Materials & Resources Energy & Atmosphere LEED-NC Gold Figure 1. Percentage of total possible points in each credit category that the proposed LEED-NC Silver and Gold certifications for The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum earns. In categories where the percentage of points earned is low, this appears due in large part to the vernacular nature of the building; the intended use and expected occupancy; and location. However, with this proposed LEED-NC Silver certification plan, the museum rehabilitation is earning at least 50% of the available points in five of the seven credit categories and earning all Regional Priority points available. To achieve LEED-NC Gold the project team would need to increase point percentages in the Water Efficiency, Materials and Resources and Energy and Atmosphere credit categories. 94 Conclusion Achieving LEED-Silver certification under the new 2009 rating system would place The Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum at the forefront of sustainable historic preservation in the United States. Not only would this project use the newest rating system which is relatively untested for historic rehabilitations, but because as Frey and Wells revealed and according to the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP), the museum would be unique as a LEED-certified historic vernacular building.5 A successful LEED-certified rehabilitation of the museum that preserves the building's character defining features like the plank construction, floor plan, fenestration and cladding; and incorporates sustainable designs could guide future rehabilitation of other historic vernacular buildings in the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park in Skagway, Alaska and elsewhere. However, LEED should be seen as a "tool" and "for some buildings/projects it just doesn't make sense.,,6 Barbara A. Campagna, FAlA LEED AP with NTHP estimates that for some historic rehabilitation projects seeking LEED certification the cost for USGBC registration and hiring a LEED consultant alone may reach $40,000.7 While a LEED-certified rehabilitation of the museum may not incur LEED -related expenses to this extent, the project team should expect additional costs for certification; hiring of a commissioning authority (related to EA Prerequisite 1) and other 5 Director of Architecture for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Barbara A. Campagna, FAlA, LEED AP, Graham GundArchitect ofthe National Trust, Stewardship ofHistoric Sites confirmed that as of April 2009 there were no LEED-certified or registered historic vernacular buildings. May 6, 2009, e-mail message to author. 6 Barbara A. Campagna, FAlA, LEED AP, Graham Gund Architect of the National Trust, Stewardship of Historic Sites, May 6, 2009, e-mail message to author. 7 Ibid. 95 consultants to assist with particular credits; and salary for time spent by project team members on submittal paperwork alone. The sustainable goals set forth by the project team for the rehabilitation of the museum could be achieved without LEED. Free of the rating system, funding and time that would have been directed toward LEED- expenses could be directed toward interpretative and educational strategies to promote the National Park Service's commitment to historic preservation and it inherent sustainability. Moreover the first priority for rehabilitation of any historic structure is to follow the Standards for Rehabilitation established by of the Secretary of the Interior: 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 96 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 8 Ultimately, pursuing LEED certification for the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum will be the decision of the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park Superintendent. Weighing the benefits versus cost will be a crucial component of making this decision. Economic benefits of LEED certification, such as state rehabilitation tax credits for privately owned buildings, are not available for buildings owned by the National Park Service. Thus, the economic benefits of LEED certification for publicly-owned and non- commercial buildings like the museum are limited. The costs associated with LEED certification for the museum will be expenses not directly recouped. 8 Kay D. Weeks and Anne E. Grimmer, The Secretary ofthe Interior's Standardsfor the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Washington D.C.:U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995),62. 97 This thesis suggests that it certainly is possible to achieve LEED celiification and earn a Silver or Gold rating with the rehabilitation of the museum. LEED-certification is desirable given its recognition in the United States as the standard for green building. The LEED rating system could be used as a tool to meet the sustainability goals of the project, but it should not be prescriptive nor push the rehabilitation beyond the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. All successful rehabilitations of historic buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places adhere to these standards and the Jeff Smith's Parlor Museum - LEED or not LEED- certified should be no exception. The National Park Service, in recognizing their responsibility as the governmental leader in preservation assists the general public through their example by following the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and sustainably rehabilitating historic buildings. Vernacular buildings like the Jeff. Smith's Parlor Museum are common to all National and State Parks in the United States. Throughout the U.S., these modest historic buildings are being considered for reuse to meet the needs of the next generation that seemingly considers the future to be better than the past. Historic buildings should be sustainably rehabilitated with an eye to the future, sensitivity to the past and not at the expense of the resource - "change it but don't destroy . ,,9It. 9 Lopate, Phillip, "Ada Louise Huxtable, the Dean of Architecture Critics, Discusses New York," NYTimes.com, November 7,2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/ll/09/nyregion/thecity/09huxt.html?_r=l&adxnnl=l&pagewanted =1&adxnnlx=12420l5829-BlXEXN4IGeYQr4qDP4kzFA (accessed November 9,2008). Ada Louise Huxtable on her preservation philosophy. APPENDIX A HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY DRAWINGS 98 L,-------, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ft:1nll~:;::;;::==fI; : i I II!; II I II g~ II I . II I I 1 II I~! III ; - I II i~ ~ I II II I II II I II II : ~ ~ I II II I II II I II II I tJ tJ I II III I II III I II II I I II III \ R A I I II II I I II III I II III ~fi JU ------------------Dr. 'lYDImIiDI 'mIOImI BIOI: cnoe I:IIIDiO'G J"{{lgsill'l HO'nIVd S lIJJJ'lS o!MU ., '·1 w U~ ~ (/) D.aDUI _-::.-:---=-_ IICPIIIYII B.JII[D -..nocDmI .tI:l8III.at ., z ~ o ~ zj 0.. Q:: og u.. I - .... - 1 ....,.,1 ........ -.':.1~~ .. ,I ~4 'Ir.aOtIID 'mImmI~ llDI IDlDI1D KillISill'i 1I0'mVd S HJ.INS .uit ~ r--------.'------- -I -_._-- I 'IO'IIl'f& BJWJIB D6IDCDlft'~ 102 XJ ~~ 0 a I '" ~\ :! iil~0 T, ;... ~] ~ / ?l-I 4:~ z 0 f- U w !!2 0 z « i --'CL ~ c..?Z ~ :::i J wu0 W f- U --1- w --'u.. ~ W0::: I ~ l, - I - .... - '<£-20 1........-.':.I~~ .. JDd~ ommmI BROI: cnoD P!lDil1m J'l!liSrrN HO'mVd S lIJJJ'lS .u:u "-I ---------'llalllY'd .B.IWJIII IW10CIImI »OIIlIIUIl ~ ~ '" Ii :! ~ 103 o o 0 0 ~ ~ U , 0 z I ....J W u.. ~WI 0:0 :: 1-..··-1 ...... 1...... - ..,:-!~~ -- .- CD -3Nn H::U..... .,..~ 'mIOImI BlOB trIOD JIIICDIl7m l'ffi:ISfU'( 1I J "! l N CD I I- 0:: o ~ z « ...J a.. U i= I- « 104 :lIlY' '1r.Dl:WI:I8 'mIl:A'fJI JIIlt)8 cnoo :IDDI7m Plll:iISllJI HO'nIVd S HJJJ{S .u:iIt -'I _.._-- ---E7JIJII I"JWJaI BorIOGJl'r'I MOIIIIUGI' 105 . ';!:" 'I .. 3Nn HOi"'" - L_ I u r---------------~ I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I f=-= =f;;$$~~~;;$$;;;J!= =II I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I~= I 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I 0== =F 0== ==== :-----'i<--+ I~!J j 1**=1=l=~i=:=j~*I*I'***'*=I=4I1I I I 1**=*,**,*,*=*=*,**,**'**"*=##'*1 : 1 I ~*I,,*,*##**,~~~r=*IlI I 1 I 1 \~r=Pi~=*=i=i=*=i=*=i=\:,**=i=\:=9=M: I I 1 I I 1 I u 1 I 1 I-----'i<--+ 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I : IrlO- : I 1 I I 1 1--+-+ I 1 I I I I 1I I 1 I I 1 I: : I I 1 1 1 I I fo--' I 1 I , , I f- ::> o !:?- z « ---' CL u ~ « II~ Ih lit ~ i ~ 1 I ROOF RIDGE i! IROOFRIOGE~ JEFF. SMITHS PARLOR =1 ;;,~I I ~I " -- DATUM~~~ ~ t:=':l:=c~"'-- III . r---- 001~~ II 1== 1~~"" §i r---- 1== 001 DATUM - ~ ~iL ~~= CJ ~~-o::: -'" ~IICJFIRST FLOOR o 5 10 20 30 eN. ~ NORTH ELEVATiON SCAL.£: 1/~!' '" "-0" SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4"' '" ,'-0· , 12 IN. ...... o 0'1 ....~ TnlOIDJl :&BIll: am I:DDID"lI PlillISilli 1I0'n1Vd S HJJJiS .u:iU' 107 -3Nn H:UYft ::El=l III ~ ~B ~ I -===: -- I I ~ 6'-27,B" ~ 5'-1/2" ~ w ~ :Ii a: '" 0 ~0 0 0a: a: ~~ 0 0 t;0 II: a: ti: N, -< z o;:: f;l '" ,. -< zg f;l '" :r: I- ::) o (/) z o i= «\, >.'W- -1 II W~ I- j~ 3Nn H:)lm - _..-_..------------- laIfd~ "InIDIDIrI BIDJ d10D DICDIl'7Ea Nll:ilSllJ( lI Lt ~ e::0 u: 1 .. B/&OJ,-,L t·B190hB t D~ _ ---801BoI I)WJIII JLlJOlDn'II JI:lIlaUU zQ B '" a> z o§ '" :r: I- cr o z z o I- ~j W ...J II w~ I-j ~ 108 3Nn H01VPt - .,..~ "IhB&PX.. CI'IOD DJlDIO'II: ft!liSllJi HO'nIVd S lLLD'lS o!I.>!:lr w a: '" ~Q;;: "l'; :> I-!< "Q ta: Q1 ... 9/£ O~-.l. t ..9He-,9 .I.,,,, _-::.-:-...:-_ BD'IlIYd B,.IIIDIII IIolIOCM'K~ "Z Q ~ '" z 9 '" I f- :::> 0 (/) Z 0 f- ?w~I ---' ,« z w .. 0 f->i=[;l (/) ~'" wI ~ 109 110 en I ~ m ~ z II a ~ I- ~ ~ li.f~ _ IIO'IlIYd BJIIDIB ILrJO(bMI »D8I:IUIr Dfd 'MBIOI8IB 'mIDImI BBoa llIOD DICDIC'II ~ill'i HO'mVd S ILLIJ'(S H:iIt a: w w " " ~ ~e " '"i< ~"- Z ....e :; '"e ~ a:a: u: "1 4'·81/2" t 7'·6118" t 6"·11318" t « I ~ J.\'" Dr, 'n'tBII)I,IDl 'lllIfm'ftl BIDa cnoa I:IIGJIOD ~ill'i H o V1 w I w z o i= u w V1 112 .,11~ 'IfKOIDK B8QI: «noD IDDIlnI ~S!ll'l H- II >- II f- ~ f- ~ --l --l --l ~ --l ~- " >- "f- ~ f- ,. --l --l ~ --l ~ --l ~