CASE STUDY: The Magnolias Affordable Modular Housing
First Community Housing Creates Affordable Multifamily Rental Property
PRODUCT CATEGORIES Type | Name
Magnolias is a 66-unit, affordable modular housing development located in Morgan Hill, CA., developed by First Community Housing (FCH) in partnership with SERA Architects, Factory OS, and Synergy Modular. This multifamily rental property will become a home for low-income individuals, families, and veterans, and provide support services including short-term rental assistance.
The project aims for LEED Platinum certification and places a strong emphasis on equity and community-centered design. The project team collaborated with the Habitable to identify healthier material options to improve occupant health and reduce impacts on fenceline communities.
Healthier Material Recommendations and Lessons Learned
Get it right from the start
To kick things off, the project team convened the owners, architects, and modular factory to confirm the project’s healthier material goals and emphasize the importance of adopting a product-type approach to support healthier material selection. This meant using HBN’s Hazard Spectrums early in the design process to prioritize product types that minimize the impact on the health of occupants, workers, and fenceline communities. HBN’s Hazard Spectrums facilitate this process by using a red-to-green (worse to better) approach to rank different product types within a product category based on their content and associated hazards.
Seize opportunities to transform future practice
While safer product selection was not always possible, the team seized opportunities to inform their future practice and that of their suppliers. For example, the roofing system warranties required the project team to procure both insulation and roofing from the same manufacturer. For the roofing membrane, the team selected thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO). Although TPO is made out of plastic, it avoids key chemicals of concern including vinyl (polyvinyl chloride / PVC) and phthalates, making it a good option from a material health perspective
However, there were tradeoffs for the insulation, where the only option offered by the manufacturer was a polyisocyanurate board. Though it’s an
established industry standard material, it contains halogenated flame retardants, which can be toxic and persistent in the environment. While the potential for resident exposure to the halogenated flame retardant in this application is limited, there are potential exposures at other life cycle stages. The team used this as an opportunity to relay to the manufacturer their preference for a halogen-free polyiso option for future projects
Recycled content can include hazardous chemicals
Using products with recycled content can help mitigate the human and environmental impacts related to the extraction of raw materials and the manufacturing of new products. However, recycled content can bring along hazardous chemicals from the source material into new products. When products contain recycled content, it’s important to know more about the origin of the recycled content and how the content was screened to avoid hazards. Walter Currin, Associate at SERA Architects, noted, “Working with HBN opened our eyes to the fact that recycled content is not always the healthier and more sustainable content. Specifically for this project, we learned that drywall with higher recycled content often has higher mercury emissions during drywall manufacturing.” (Learn more on the Drywall Hazard Spectrum page.)
Figure 1. Hazard Spectrum Rankings of Materials Specified in the Project
Healthier Materials and Environmental Justice
Although toxic chemicals affect all of us, they disproportionately impact the health of communities of color, low-income families, and children. In addition to occupant exposures during the use phase, products and the chemicals used to make them can have impacts throughout the entire life cycle. Figure 2 highlights three of the highest-priority chemicals avoided in this project through the selection of safer building product types, indicating their impact on human and environmental health.
For example, all paints specified for use in the units are APE-free, avoiding dozens of pounds of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (chemicals that interfere with how hormones work in the body). Avoiding APEs protects the health of the residents of the Magnolias, the manufacturers of the modular units, and the fenceline communities that surround manufacturing plants. Similarly, by choosing linoleum over vinyl (PVC) flooring, the project avoids highly toxic chemicals that are released during the manufacturing of PVC, which impact the health of workers in those factories and the communities nearby. It also avoids toxic pollution that may be generated when vinyl is disposed of. Lastly, halogenated flame retardants can be persistent and bioaccumulative toxicants (PBTs), meaning that they last for long periods, and accumulate in your body; they can also be carcinogens, making their avoidance in insulation a high priority. Avoiding halogenated flame retardants supports the health of residents, installers, manufacturing workers, and fenceline communities.
IN THEIR OWN WORDS | SERA’S CALL TO ACTION “Material selection and specification is typically driven by short-term cost and familiarity, among other factors. Assessing, selecting, and convincing clients and builders to use healthier materials can be a lengthy and challenging process for design teams. Despite this, design teams, owners, builders, and the general public are becoming more concerned about the health impacts of buildings and are beginning to understand the impacts of toxic and forever chemicals in our built environment. It isup to building professionals to commit to learning about and implementing many of the better alternatives that are emerging in the market and disrupt the status quo. Interrogating materials while managing a design can be unfamiliar and hard work for design teams, but we must demand better to help push the industry forward and improve the health and longevity of the spaces we create. As you set out on your journey to choose safer materials, don’t hold yourself to being perfect. Start with what you know best, and define your goals early, incrementally building on experience and the learnings of others. Every project will have a different path to safer materials. Make the path your own, and stand by it.” SERA Architects, 2021ontent goes here
Neither HBN nor its HomeFree program endorses or certifies products. Products in this case study are included for informational purposes, and demonstrate choices made by HomeFree users based on multiple factors including cost and availability, utilizing HomeFree guidance to make healthier material choices within project constraints.
CASE STUDY: American Cancer Society’s Hope Lodge Facility
Perkins and Will and American Cancer Society make huge strides in achieving Material Health and Transparency goals in cancer recovery facility.
By Erica Mercer, Project Architect & Associate at Perkins&Will
Facing cancer is hard enough, but having to travel long distances for treatment and finding accommodations for days, weeks and even months makes the situation much harder. This is the case for thousands of cancer patients in rural areas, who each year travel to Dallas-Ft. Worth it to receive potentially life-saving cancer treatment. The emotional and financial toll of the loss of income, medical bills, hotel rooms, and dining out is staggering.
Cancer patients and their caregivers will soon find help and hope when home is far away, thanks to the American Cancer Society. Their fundraising efforts have led to constructing of a new Hope Lodge facility in Dallas, scheduled for completion in 2021. Named the Gene and Jerry Jones Family Hope Lodge in recognition of their lead gift, the 40,000-square-foot facility will provide free lodging for cancer patients traveling more than 40 miles from home to receive life-saving cancer treatment at nearby medical campuses. Each of the 50 guestrooms has two beds and a private bathroom, providing more than 18,000 nights of free lodging annually. In addition, the facility will feature common living areas, a dining room, laundry facilities, a library, a meditation room, and an outdoor healing garden. Patients and their caregivers will also have access to the current offerings of the American Cancer Society’s programs and services.
At the outset of the project in 2014, Material Health and Transparency wasn’t yet a buzzword. However, the sensitive health needs of occupants of the Hope Lodge Dallas project became the impetus for Perkins and Will and the American Cancer Society to make huge strides in achieving Material Health and Transparency goals in the design and construction of this cancer recovery facility.
They set a specific goal of reducing carcinogens and immunotoxicants in the building where guests retreat after exhausting days of treatment. The removal of substances of concern minimizes negative health effects within the indoor environment and allows patients to heal as quickly as possible.
A Letter of Commitment was published in 2018 by Perkins and Will and the American Cancer Society outlining a central tenant: a commitment to reducing and eliminating substances of concern in the built environment linked to negative impact on human health. Suppliers and manufacturers were urged to disclose material ingredients in full, to 100 ppm, and to provide a written commitment to eliminate “Precautionary List” substances from their products. Through the effort, Perkins and Will and the American Cancer Society reinforced their support of a non-toxic and transparent materials market.
A Campus Designed to Achieve the Highest Standards of Material Health.
The Gene and Jerry Jones Family Hope Lodge was designed to meet the highest standards of material health set by WELL and LEED. To comply with those standards, the team selected as many products with transparency documentation as possible so that substances of concern could be identified and eliminated. The preferred transparency tool for manufacturers to disclose material health was the HPD report, which contains the most comprehensive product data to compare substances of concern against the Perkins and Will Precautionary List, the requirements of the WELL Building Standard, and LEED Materials and Resources credits.
Priority was to given to healthy interior materials that occupants frequently come into contact with, as well as healthier high-volume building products such as flooring and paint. The team used a variety of platforms to assess over 80 different products and select the best products for Hope Lodge Dallas, including Perkins and Will’s internal database, which contains a list of products that have met the firm’s library protocol.
The Perkins and Will library protocol requires manufacturers to submit at least one form of transparency documentation and add their product to the Mindful Materials database prior to being accepted into the finish library. As a result of this protocol, Perkins and Will was able to analyze the transparency documentation and implement an internal library labeling system with products rated on a spectrum of “good, better, best”. While some projects merely ask for transparency, the project team reviewed, assessed and eliminated products with substances of concern, resulting in the scrutiny of 82 building materials.
The use of these natural and healthy materials contributed to a warm, inviting and healthy environment. Other sustainable features include bioswales, high efficiency plumbing and electrical fixtures, reduced energy consumption methods, natural daylight, individual user controllability of lighting and thermal comfort, and advanced air purification.
A Building That Could Improve The Lives of Cancer Patients.
Almost every person on the project team has been touched in some way by cancer. The Perkins and Will team had a significant emotional investment in the project, and truly believed that their design decisions could help ease the strain during cancer treatment and improve a patient’s quality of life. In the best case scenario, the project could help improve the life of a cancer patient undergoing immune-weakening treatments by providing them a healthy environment in which to heal. As a result, the team maintained a lot of passion and dedication to finding the healthiest products possible to specify on this project.
Perkins and Will plans to implement post-occupancy evaluations to measure the effectiveness of the selected healthy materials and their impact on building occupants.
The Gene and Jerry Jones Family Hope Lodge was a pilot project that helped Perkins and Will to significantly advance material health practices. As a result, a new material health strategy and process was set in place that can be implemented in future projects including:
The Wellness and Sustainable Design Verification Form that helps contractors ensure different products meet the project goals
Firmwide Material Tracking Worksheet that is used for Perkins and Will’s internal Sustainable Performance Review
A Letter of Commitment that is used to secure buy-in from Clients or Manufacturers
A Library Protocol that is used to help project teams prepare, meet, label and present transparency documentation
Perkins & Will learned of the power of specifications and the role they play in designing and implementing buildings with high standards for material health. These types of projects are most successful when healthy materials are identified very early in the design process, and implemented into the written specifications, along with acceptable alternatives.
Fortunately, the transparency and material health movement has greatly advanced since Perkins and Will began design for Hope Lodge Dallas over 6 years ago. Today, there are many more materials with published transparency documentation and easy-to-use databases that allow quick access to Material Health information. And while not every firm can vet 80 or more products, Perkins and Will recommends starting out by fully applying transparency to one of the most used products on projects.
Having invested in this project, Perkins and Will expects the process will be much faster for the next project. Their experience on the Gene and Jerry Jones Family Hope Lodge project will allow them to implement healthy materials on all projects moving forward.
Lessons Learned This project was one of the first projects that the design team had the opportunity to implement material health goals, therefore the project was a learning process from start to finish. Some take-aways include: Healthy material selections need to be fully integrated into the specifications as basis-of-design and their attributes included as performance criteria. The team should vet the acceptable alternatives for manufacturers, and ensure those are free of substances of concern. Be specific about what substances are to be avoided in order to find products free of substances of concern.
CASE STUDY: Engaging Supply Chains in Transparency
A Comparative Case Study of How to Engage Supply Chains in Transparency
Creating HPDs for manufacturers requires critical supply chains cooperation
By Lisa Britton, Director of Sales & Marketing, Sustainability Champion, Industrial Louvers, Inc.
Building an accurate Health Product Declaration (HPD) is challenging for any organization. Lisa Britton has led the process with two organizations: Alpar Architectural Products, LLC, a company she founded, and Industrial Louvers, Inc. where she is Director of Sales & Marketing. Although each company has different products and unique challenges, the shared component of success was engaged and informed suppliers.
Britton brings a unique and personal perspective to two distinct efforts to guide companies to use more healthful alternatives through the HPD.
Key Strategies for Success #1: Simple product formulations also helped Alpar complete HPDs with limited resources. The deTerra material, a cross-linked PLA, has only two ingredients in its untinted form. #2: One of ILI’s major paint suppliers, brought on a toxicologist who worked with other experts to disclose all the known chemical hazards in the products it uses As A Result Its unusually engaged and educated supply chain allowed ILI to assemble meaningful information, and now ILI expects to be the first in its product sector to publish HPDs under version 2.0.
HPD 1: deTerra biobased polymer as Alpar Architectural Products, LLC
Britton founded Alpar Architectural Products, LLC, in 2009. She aimed to provide a more healthful alternative to polyvinyl chloride (PVC) wall protection. Alpar teamed with Interfacial Solutions IP, LLC (IFS), to develop deTerra®, the industry’s first fire-rated, biobased polymer, for which Alpar has exclusive license in the construction industry. Alpar’s ability to create a fully disclosed HPD began in the very early stages of product development before the Health Product Declaration Collaborative was established.
The official HPD journey started in 2010, when Alpar was one of 29 manufacturers that participated in the HPD pilot. Because Alpar’s competitive advantage was based on providing material without known toxicants, the HPD was an important development that allowed us to lend credibility to our claims. The team at IFS understood this, and rather than resisting disclosure, they worked closely with Alpar to report chemical information completely and correctly. By the time they published an HPD under version 1.0, they also had the support of Natureworks, LLC, supplier of polylactic acid (PLA), the primary ingredient in deTerra biobased polymer.
Key Strategy for Success: Start with simple formulations
Having simple product formulations also helped Alpar to complete HPDs with limited resources. The deTerra material, a cross- linked PLA, has only two ingredients in its untinted form. Extruded and molded parts are either affixed to the wall with adhesive or combined with aluminum extrusions. Their first HPDs were based on assemblies with untinted material, our most popular option. Building HPDs that included pigments proved more challenging because colorant suppliers were resistant to sharing information, but eventually they allowed us to share known hazards without disclosing chemical names.
In 2012 Alpar was acquired by the Pawling Corporation, which continued to support disclosure efforts. Pawling realized that because deTerra’s competitive advantage was based on its nontoxic formulation, the reward for disclosure outweighed the risk of revealing what most companies would consider trade secrets.
HPD 2: Aluminum extrusions with a Kynar® finish for Industrial Louvers, Inc.
ILI’s products posed a different set of opportunities and new challenges for creating HPDs. Unlike Alpar, which developed products with the understanding that disclosure was eminent, ILI had to persuade legacy suppliers to support disclosure. (Challenge)
ILI is a manufacturer of custom architectural metal products, most of which are installed on building exteriors; louvers, sunshades, and equipment screens constitute most of our business. Most products are made from aluminum extrusions that are mechanically fastened together and then finished in-house with a Kynar® finish.
Its products, particularly sunshades, are used as part of green building strategies, and the sustainable building market is central to its business. Commitment to reducing our environmental impact is engrained in the culture and operations, so attention to chemical safety in our plant is paramount. Despite this, awareness of potential human health hazards of chemicals in the company’s finished products is new, primarily because market drivers, including the LEED rating system, have until now virtually ignored exterior products. (new challenge)
Although committed to HPDs, initially ILI was not optimistic about being able to publish meaningful data. Its products are rarely used without finishes, which commonly contain health hazards.
Key Strategy for Success: Engage experts to help disclose known chemicals
Paint companies are notorious for protecting their color formulations, considered trade secrets. One of ILI’s major paint suppliers, Valspar, brought on a toxicologist with experience in creating and verifying HPDs. The toxicologist worked with other experts within her company and with ILI staff to disclose all the known chemical hazards in the products it uses. (problem and solution)
Its unusually engaged and educated supply chain allowed ILI to assemble meaningful information, and now ILI expects to be the first in its product sector to publish HPDs under version 2.0.
Both Alpar and ILI had limited resources to devote to creating HPDs, so having relatively simple product formulations enabled both companies to be early adopters. HPD version 2.0 incorporates improved tools, but complex assemblies and products will still pose challenges.
Whatever new tools are available, manufacturers can produce accurate HPDs only with cooperation from their supply chains. Market demand for transparency and tools for educating the supply chain will be critical.
By Max Richter, Senior Architect Associate, Perkins+Will
Located in the heart of urban Vancouver in a temperate rainforest climate, the VanDusen Botanical Garden is a 55-acre oasis. Its Visitor Center, certified as LEED Platinum, is the first building in Canada to apply for the Living Building Challenge.
Perkins+Will was the architect, product specifier, and sustainability consultant for the project with the primary responsibility to choose materials. The City of Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation supported the sustainability goals of the project and demonstrated an openness to a materials selection process that was longer and more challenging than for a conventional project.
At the outset of the project, the project team established a comprehensive set of sustainable objectives that included goals for materials selection:
Avoid building products that contain substances on the Living Building Challenge materials Red
Select locally sourced materials and
Use wood as the primary structural system and utilize 100% Forest Stewardship Council-certified
Choose building products that have a low embodied carbon
Source and use reclaimed and salvaged
Key Strategies for Success #1: Limiting the use of materials had the dual benefits of reinforcing the architectural expression of the building and using local building products that were easily understood in composition and origin
#2: Because the adoption of transparency in the building materials industry was just getting underway, developing custom questionnaires helped to address the documentation requirements of the Living Building Challenge
Key Strategy for Success 1: Use simple materials of simple origin and ingredients
Three sustainable design charrettes were held as the project concept was being developed. (ah-ha solution) It was during this phase that the design team discovered one of the best strategies to meet the requirements of the Living Building Challenge: use simple materials with simpler origin and ingredient stories.
Considering the combined challenges of finding Red-List-free building products, specifying products available locally, and minimizing the embodied carbon footprint of the project, the project team chose to limit the design to a palette of only a few elemental materials — heavy timber, glass, aluminum, and concrete.
Limiting the use of materials had the dual benefits of reinforcing the architectural expression of the building and using local building products that were easily understood in composition and origin.
Key Strategy for Success 2: Address product material requirements with suppliers
Schematic design for the project started in early 2008, before the Health Product Declaration standard was inaugurated and just as the Healthy Building Network’s Pharos Project was launched.
Because the adoption of transparency in the building materials industry was just getting underway, developing custom questionnaires helped to address the documentation requirements of the Living Building Challenge.
These were distributed to suppliers whose products were being considered for use in the project.
Communicate the project’s aims and requirements
Building materials manufacturers were familiar with the requirements for LEED certification, such as VOC emission rates and the percentages of recycled content, but were less well acquainted with the aims and requirements of the Living Building Challenge.
A common response to the request for transparency and disclosure about materials was, “Why do you need that information? It’s not required for LEED.” That hurdle was overcome through explanation and communication with the manufacturers.
Monitor Suppliers to Avoid Substances on the Red List
A secondary challenge was that many manufacturers purchase ingredients or parts from other suppliers and had either not investigated the composition of those products and/or were prevented from reporting information by nondisclosure agreements.
The challenge of avoiding substances on the Red List continued into the construction phase of the project. Ledcor played a vital role in communicating and policing the requirements of the Living Building Challenge with all of the subcontractors. Through the construction process, the subcontractors embraced the design and the objectives of the project and took an active role in suggesting construction methods or products that would help the project.
Lessons learned The primary lesson learned was to start the process of materials research, selection, and specification early in the design process. Because comprehension of the objectives and documentation requirements of the Living Building Challenge was not widespread, educating the manufacturers became one of our primary roles in the process. A second lesson learned was to choose a simple palette of materials. Complex, composite materials necessitate spending additional time and effort in discussion and correspondence with the manufacturers to fully determine their suitability for the project. Despite the extensive research, many products specified for the project had small, unforeseen components that contained Red List substances, such as the neoprene gaskets found in illuminated exit signs. Ultimately, the project team’s strategies of starting the research and selection process early and keeping the material palette simple helped the project achieve the challenging set of sustainable objectives.
Thoughtful, Intentional Decision-making Leads to a Better Building for People and the Environment
Brock Environmental Center is among the first in the nation to embrace energy and water independence
By Greg Mella, SmithGroupJJR
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation set out to create the most sustainable building possible for the new Brock Environmental Center, This aspiration included a new mindset on the materials for the new building.
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation built the Brock Environmental Center to engage, inform, and inspire generations about the environment and how people can all help Save the BayTM. The Foundation’s goal was to create the most sustainable building possible. This aspiration included a new mindset on the materials for the new building.
The project team established specific goals for materials selection:
Avoiding materials that contain 14 “red list” ingredients;
Requiring disclosure of the chemical constituents of building materials;
Pursuing locally sourced materials to the greatest extent possible;
Maximizing the use of salvaged and reclaimed materials; and
Purchasing wood products certified by the Forest Sustainability
These goals were components of the client’s pursuit of the Living Building Challenge and LEED Platinum certification. Additionally, the foundation saw the correlation between material impacts and the health of the Chesapeake Bay. Given this, another goal was to set a high benchmark for others to follow.
Key Strategies For Success: Avoid chemicals of concern by using natural materials and products with minimal processing
The design team met those goals using a systematic but novel process for materials selection. They embraced a philosophy that the safest way to avoid chemicals of concern was to use natural materials and products with minimal processing, like metals, wood, stone, and concrete. This approach was consistent with the project’s design goal to connect visitors to the project’s unique site through the material palette.
As selections progressed, the design team contacted manufacturers to learn whether their products contained red- list chemicals. Initially, they were satisfied with a manufacturer’s letter indicating that the product was compliant, but over time we realized that a more rigorous approach was needed. Some manufacturers stated that their products complied, but red-list ingredients were found in their literature or in MSDSs. These were not deliberate attempts to deceive, but rather reflect how few individuals within a company actually know what is in the products they make, combined with the complexity of chemical accounting. (While the red list has only 14 ingredients, these contain over 300 chemicals with unique CAS numbers.) The approach was modified to pursue a full accounting of materials, preferably via a health product declaration (HPD). The team assumed a product did contain red-list chemicals unless they could vet for themselves a complete list of ingredients. Occasional exceptions were needed if manufacturers indicated a small portion of the ingredients were proprietary, and those exceptions were accompanied by advocacy letters encouraging greater transparency.
Key Strategies For Success: Create and document a system for roles and responsibilities in large scale projects
Materials research involved all project stakeholders. The contractor, brought on during early design, shared the research effort with the architect, subcontractors, owner, and their representatives. An all-day charrette was used to create and document a methodology for materials research and to “divide and conquer” upon realization of the magnitude of the task. Figure 1 illustrates a portion of the process established during this charrette and shows the role materials transparency played in the selection process.
Many of a building’s components are guided by generic performance specifications instead of proprietary specifications (e.g., lumber, wiring, piping, small accessories). The architect researched the proprietary products while the contractor and subcontractors vetted the other products.
Subcontractor involvement was valuable, given the role subcontractors play in determining the specific products that make up a building.
Figure 1: Materials Selection
Process Courtesty: SmithGroupJJR
Key Strategies For Success: To reduce costs, select salvaged and reclaimed materials wherever possible
The team found that products with good disclosure of ingredients do not have a cost premium; however, the potential soft costs associated with material research can be significant. They used approaches to reduce this fee impact. Owner, architect, and contractor each hired interns to assist with the research. The initial charrette established a clearly defined process and tools to organize research, allowing a smooth hand-off to interns. Incorporating salvaged and reclaimed materials wherever possible (siding, flooring, trim, doors, lavatories, tile, granite, and hardware) simplified materials research. Selecting natural, bio-based materials also lessened the need for complicated ingredients research.
Lessons Learned The team’s work contributed to a building with fewer potentially hazardous chemicals and more intrinsically safe materials based on a thoughtful, intentional decision-making process. These attributes contribute to a better building for people and the environment. While the team knew that getting disclosure of ingredients would be hard, they believe that as more and more teams ask for this information, the burden will be reduced significantly for teams that follow. They committed to publicly sharing their materials research by posting it on their website. They update it regularly, at http://www.smithgroupjjr.com/info/ transparency/. The benefits of their efforts are not immediate, but in time, as more teams demand HPDs, others will have the ability to make more informed choices about the products they include in their design. To quote Justice Louis Brandeis, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” As manufacturers embrace greater transparency, people are beginning to see their efforts pleasantly accompanied by the elimination of chemicals with known health hazards. That is the end goal and justification for the research and advocacy on this project.
CASE STUDY: The Durst Organization’s Mixed-use Buildings
Product Transparency Requires a Deeper Look at Factors Behind Scores and Other Performance Criteria Screens
The Durst Organization’s three multifamily, mixed-use buildings establish a new set of green building goals
By Amanda Kaminsky, Founder, Building Product Ecosystems LLC, and former Sustainable Construction Manager for the Durst Organization, John Amatruda, RA, LEED Fellow, Principal, Vidaris, Inc., and Bill Walsh, Founder & President, Habitable
The Durst Organization (TDO) has a long history of developing environmentally responsible office towers and residential buildings that reduce energy and water consumption, incorporate innovative design strategies and technologies, and promote the well-being of their occupants. In 2012, at the onset of developing three new multifamily, mixed-use buildings in New York City, the project consultant team developed a new set of company-specific green building goals for TDO that combined lessons learned from previous green projects with new environmental initiatives.
The new goals included:
An aggressive emphasis on building occupant and ecological health The use of newly defined product transparency data to make informed product selections The achievement of these goals has necessitated a more integrated process between TDO and our designers, construction teams, and consultants, as well as detailed interactions with various product manufacturers.
One of the first things the team realized was that product transparency integration requires a mix of professional expertise. Collecting and evaluating the new information available through EPDs, HPDs, emissions testing, and other sources require both a robust outreach effort and the technical background to understand the data. The team has subsequently developed an expanded project team that includes TDO’s dedicated sustainability project managers, green building consultants with an in-house industrial hygienist (Vidaris), material health research experts (Habitable), and sustainability project managers at the construction management companies assigned to each project.
Key Strategies For Success: Selected products with improved health and sustainability profiles while also meeting other criteria
This expanded team, working in close coordination with the project designers, trade contractors, and product manufacturers, has proven critical in meeting our combined procurement goals: to select products with improved health and sustainability profiles while also meeting critical performance, aesthetic, and cost parameters.
The team started by identifying a set of “focus materials” – material types that had the highest potential for health or environmental impacts due to likely exposure and/or scale of application – within each specification section. Examples range from paints and carpet tiles to kitchen cabinetry, countertops, gypsum wallboard systems, concrete, and duct insulations and sealants.
Key Strategies For Success: Worked with manufacturers to obtain product transparency resources
For each focus material, the team assembled initial sustainability characteristics based on rating systems, standards, and criteria culled from the team’s knowledge base. These parameters guided the initial materials selections proposed by design teams. As products were proposed, the team worked with manufacturers to obtain product transparency resources, with an emphasis on health and environmental product declarations (HPDs and EPDs), emissions testing data, EC REACH reporting, GreenScreen analyses, and Declare or Cradle to Cradle certifications. This expanded information was then evaluated both to iteratively vet the proposed products and to recalibrate the sustainability characteristics (which ultimately become integrated into the specifications). The sustainability research was consistently checked against performance and costs to ensure that proposed products were acceptable to all parties.
Data for many products are becoming more available, and in some cases they found enough information to perform a “deep dig” – comparing EPDs on multiple similar products while also using HPD data and/or evaluations from the Habitable’s Pharos tool and other resources.
Lesson Learned It’s been somewhat surprising to realize how often the data presents trade-offs that require further team dialogue for careful prioritization. The team found that it’s rare for a product or product type to be clearly superior in all pertinent areas to a competing product. Figure 1, for instance, shows how their assessments of carpet tile backings varied between environmental and health-related profiles. Note that product 1A has higher environmental impacts than products 2A and 2B based on EPD data alone. The product content data, however, indicate that product 1A avoids hazardous compounds more than the other listed options. These situations require the following approaches: Look into the issues behind the data (e.g., what factors cause the products to score higher or lower in the evaluations). A set of preferred-product sustainability criteria often begins to emerge even if an “ideal” product can’t be Use other performance criteria as screens to assist in the selection This requires critical judgments from the whole project team to make selections that best meet integrated performance, health, and environmental goals. One final issue is how best to communicate the advantages of their decisions. A method they are currently testing is the Avoided Hazards Index, developed by the Habitable. In this process, the amount of hazardous materials in a given product is quantified based on HPDs or other information. It’s then possible to estimate the quantities of hazardous substances that have been avoided through the informed selection process, compared with one or more alternatives.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
