TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    Science

    Podcasts Archive | Steven Winter Associates, Inc.

    We help you identify progressive solutions to improve the built environment.

    Advertise

    Copyright: © 2020 Steven Winter Associates

    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    The Devil’s in the Details: Common Accessibility Oversights with Peter Stratton Jul 06, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Peter Stratton Peter Stratton is the Managing Director of Accessibility Services at Steven Winter Associates. He has nearly 30 years of experience working with project teams to design and construct buildings to comply with laws and regulations governing accessible design and construction, improving the lives of ALL people occupying those buildings. Under Peter’s leadership, the accessibility team provides services to public and private sector clients nationwide that are designed to ensure compliance with the accessible design and construction requirements of federal, state, and local laws and building codes. With all of the moving parts during the design and construction of a building project, one wrong move can compromise accessibility compliance. Unintentional oversights are commonplace when project teams don’t realize the importance of accessibility compliance and how it can make or break a project’s success. In the end, the devil’s in the details. On this episode, we welcome back SWA’s Managing Director of Accessibility Services, Peter Stratton. Peter describes the top ten oversights made by project teams during the design and construction phases that typically lead to noncompliance with accessibility requirements. Learn why they happen, and how they can be identified and avoided in your project! Follow along with Peter’s list of accessibility oversights below: Design stage Appropriate details are not referenced on the floor plans The appropriate level of detail is not provided on the plan set Plan sets are not coordinated Designs do not incorporate tolerance Plan sets include details copied from past projects Construction stage Trades don’t follow the plans Not considering finished dimensions during rough-in Specifications/products are not coordinated with the details Compliance is not checked when things change Things aren’t level Episode Information & Resources Podcast: ‘All-Access’ with Peter Stratton SWA Party Walls Blog posts on Accessibility: https://www.swinter.com/author/peter-stratton/ Publication: A Basic Guide to Fair Housing Accessibility: Everything Architects and Builders Need to Know About the Fair Housing Act Accessibility Guidelines More information on SWA’s Accessibility Services: https://www.swinter.com/accessibility-services/ Sign up to be on the mailing list for our quarterly Accessibility Newsletter, SWA Access: https://www.swinter.com/resource-center/newsletters/ We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Intro: (00:05)Welcome to buildings and beyond the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. I’m Robb Aldrich and I’m Kelly Westby. Robb: (00:17)We had a few requests for a podcast episode focused on accessibility and really focused on what goes wrong. What are the common screw ups when trying to make buildings accessible. We reached out to Peter Stratton here at Steven Winter Associates. Who’s in charge of our accessibility group. He chatted to folks on his team and came up with a list of about 10 things. And this list was well, maybe different than what some people expected. It wasn’t a list of clearances or slopes that often get screwed up. It was a list about the process of design and construction. What often goes wrong in this process. And really, I think this is a lot more interesting and probably way more useful. Overall, he came up with about five things that go wrong in the design stage and five things that go wrong in the construction stage. And your list starts with details. The first thing on your list was details are provided by the designers, but they’re not referenced in the floor plans. Peter: (01:32)That’s right. And that’s a big one. And when I do these kinds of presentations, we always sort of launch the presentation with exactly this topic. And before we get into it, the more common oversights that are made in design, we’ll discuss five, but as you might know, there are many more than five. And we’ll talk about pretty much the most common that we see, it’s not uncommon that architects include at the top of the plan set generic details. When we see generic details provided at the top of the plans, that it sort of informs us. And I think right at the jump, we’ve really got to take a look at the plan set to confirm that the generic details that are often included at the top of the plan set actually fit the context of the design. Peter: (02:37)And when they don’t, that’s when we get into problems. So, often an architect, a designer might reference the technical criteria or the accessibility requirements of a local code and sort of copy and paste details, the criteria, for example, into the plan set. And so, we might receive a plan set for a multifamily residential development. And up at the top of the plan set are sort of these generic bathroom details, which are perfectly compliant. But then, when we sort of dig into the plan set and take a look at the design, we realize that we can’t align those generic details with the actual design. And it would be unrealistic to expect that a contractor would design a project off a generic detail when what they’re actually working on is sort of later on in the plan set very unrelated to those generic details. Robb: (03:49)So, yeah, it seems like they didn’t really do their due diligence and designing. Peter: (03:59)It could be that they didn’t do their due diligence, but it also could be that there was good intention. But the process of design really sort of doesn’t align with the good intention. We’ve got to do a little bit more than just copy and paste generic details up at the plan set. I think one of the first things to do is to ensure that those details included at the top of the plants that are not generic, that they actually fit the context of the design. Robb: (04:33)Okay, how about an example? I mean, clearances or ramps or so. Peter: (04:40)Yeah, all of the above. We often see elevations, for example, that include dimensions for the installation of grab bar reinforcement in bathrooms. When we take a look at the bathrooms in the plan set, you know, elevation a included in the generic detail that shows the elevation, for example, of the grab bar reinforcement for the later installation of the grab bar on the side wall next to the toilet, doesn’t align with the sidewall that is shown in the context of the design. And so, another example of a generic detail might be, often in the plan set, we see a generic detail for a U shaped kitchen, a generic detail for a galley style kitchen, but the kitchens in the floor plans are not U shape or galley. And so that’s a really good example of something that’s pretty common. Robb: (05:56)Okay. Interesting. And next on your list is, the appropriate level of detail is not provided at all. Is this where a designer just doesn’t know or doesn’t try? Peter: (06:13)It’s interesting and that pans out a whole host of different ways. I think when it comes to accessibility compliance, the level of detail and the scrutiny is so much more intense than we might imagine. It’s often unrealistic almost to expect that an architect or a designer, as a matter of normal course, would over detail a plan set to ensure that compliance is met. So, we do see what the architect might think is an appropriate level of detail, but we understand that when the design translates into the field, that the detail just isn’t enough. And so, for example, we often see, you know, partitioned details and threshold details, but the details don’t include what we need to see to ensure that the threshold, when installed, is compliant in the field. Sometimes the detailed doesn’t include a specification. So, it may include the height of a threshold, but what’s missing is the slope of the bevel on either side of the threshold, which is an important component of compliance when it comes to thresholds. So, we often want to see a higher level of detail in the plan set, but we also understand that may not be realistic, but it’s important to provide and to ensure that compliance is achieved in the field. Robb: (07:59)And that’s why you get brought in, I assume, when an architect just doesn’t have all that knowledge of all those details, the nitty gritty. Peter: (08:08)Right. We have to focus on the pinch points. We know the common busts in the field, and so we’re reviewing plan sets with the result in mind. In other words, we might identify the detail and think, well, looks good in the plan set, and we understand the design, but we’ve got to include some added dimensions to ensure that what’s constructed in the field is actually constructed in the correct way. Peter: (08:39)We don’t typically get pushback. It’s appreciated I think that we have that knowledge, and can sort of transfer that knowledge to the client. Robb: (08:54)So for this bullet point, which was that the appropriate level of detail is just not provided in the plans, it doesn’t necessarily mean you have a clueless designer. It’s just that the level of detail is so deep that it’s… Peter: (09:10)That’s right. That’s exactly right. Robb: (09:15)The next one, I can appreciate, plan sets are not coordinated. So the architect may know all the right details and the architectural drawings may look perfect, but the MEP may or may not, or others may not. Peter: (09:32)That’s right. And I think that it really comes down to communication. Communication among the team. It’s not uncommon to see a set of architecturals that include compliant design. So, we will see that the control wall at the bathtub is correct. When plans, well, when the architecture set is not aligned, for example, in this case with the plumbing set, the plumbing may show the control on a wall that is different from the architectural set. And so, you know, the plumbing shops are going to be done from the plumbing plans and the engineer or the contractor who’s working on plumbing is going to look at the plumbing shops, and if they’re not coordinated, the result can be a major bust in the field. In fact, in our experience, we have come up against projects where the architecturals are perfectly compliant and the case of the location of the control wall at a bathtub. And then when we arrived in the field, the control wall had changed somewhere in the design process, but only in the architectural set, it was not modified and corrected in the plumbing set. Robb: (11:07)One wall was thicker and there wasn’t enough clearance? Peter: (11:10)Well, the location of the controls was on a completely different wall, which can really affect compliance in a negative way. Robb: (11:21)Yeah. And as a mechanical engineer, there’s tension between architects and engineers, as you’re familiar. And this is just one added flavor of that tension, I guess. Peter: (11:38)Similarly, in that bucket of plans sets that are not coordinated, it’s not uncommon that certain things happen in the field that aren’t addressed in the plants. We may see key fob locations or door fobs; I don’t know, I always get that wrong. You know, that little thing that you wave at the door so it opens? Yep. We’ll see, they are added on exit doors, fire, exit doors. So, adding a fob on a fire exit door makes that door an entrance. We might see security cameras installed, not addressed in the plan set, not part of the design, happens later on, and depending on where they are installed, how far they project from walls, they can violate some of the requirements. And some of the criteria that speak to protruding objects. Intercoms might be installed later on, and we assess for operable parts. Peter: (12:59)And so if we don’t have the opportunity to take a look at these things that are all part of the process, all part of the final product, but somewhere along the way, as a result of the communication, the accessibility consultant, for example, may not have been looped in. And so, everything that happens in design and construction really should involve communication with someone who knows accessibility, and it might not be an accessibility consultant. It might very well be the architect. So always some level of review is needed when it comes to the installation of things. Robb: (13:44)Interior design often happens later. Peter: (13:46)And another example and a really good one, often things happen or the interior is modified, or the interior design side is produced perhaps at a later time, may not have been part of the review. And so, we then troubleshoot these missteps in the field, which has its own level of problem, you know, problems associated with, with troubleshooting in the field. And you know, the interior design often drives the project. And so, the interior design set is very important. That is part of the review. It’s sort of critical. Robb: (14:44)How about external? Like how about the bridge between inside and outside with landscape? Peter: (14:54)Yep. When a project includes everything, which is an architectural civil landscape interior MEP, all of those trades and sets affect compliance of the final product. So, it’s important that a review not only include a review of the architecturals, which you might think, you know, that might be the only thing that an accessibility consultant might want to take a look at, which is not correct. Your design team should have all of the different sets, coordinated and reviewed into your exterior. Robb: (15:36)Yeah, that’s a big one. Coordination between the whole design team as well. Peter: (15:43)And it’s tricky, especially when you have a design architect, the executive architect, tons of design managers, tons of construction managers. Yeah, no, it becomes, a very big thing to manage and organize. Robb: (16:05)That’s their job too, on all aspects. The accessibility piece is one of the key pieces. Right? Robb: (16:18)So, this was interesting to me next on your list that designs do not incorporate tolerance. Does that just mean that designers are leaving no room for error? Or what does that mean? Peter: (16:31)Yeah, that is what that means. And it’s not uncommon for example, that we’ll see a ramp slope designed to one in 12, which is the maximum slope permitted for a ramp. We would recommend that the designers consider reducing the slope of a ramp to less than 8.3, three or less than the maximum, to allow tolerance in the field. We never want to design to the max or to the min – shooting from mid range is always best if we can do it, but working some level of tolerance into the design is key. Robb: (17:21)That makes tons of sense. Height. Like height of switches, height of… Peter: (17:29)That’s right. So, switch heights, let’s just talk in general – unobstructed forward reach in the more recent criteria, the maximum height above the finished floor, 48 inches. Now, if we specify 48 inches and show that dimension right at the light switch, chances are in the field without working in some tolerance, there’s a high level of certainty that designing to the max will result in non-compliance in the field. So, in the case of a light switch, for example, we recommend that design teams consider specifying 48 inches to the top of the electrical box. In that case, when we specify top of the electrical box, high degree of certainty, that the switch itself will be less than 48 inches. Okay. So that’s an example of working in tolerance. Robb: (18:51)Cool, cool.…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Healthy Buildings, Healthy Humans with Sarah Nugent Jun 10, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Sarah Nugent, LEED AP, WELL AP Sarah Nugent is a Sustainability Director at Steven Winter Associates on our Sustainable Building Services team. She oversees certification program management for commercial buildings, and helps guide project teams on green and high-performance building and site design strategies, cost-effective building system operation, and energy-saving maintenance practices. She has extensive project experience with LEED® Building Design + Construction, Interior Design + Construction, Neighborhood Development, and LEED for Cities and Communities Rating Systems, as well as the Collaborative for High-Performance Schools, the NYC SCA’s Green School Guidelines, the IWBI’s WELL® Building Standard and the Center for Active Design’s Fitwel® Building Standard. We think a lot about high-performance buildings – but what about the high-performance humans in those buildings? As the future of office-dwelling is on everyone’s mind, there are a lot of questions surrounding how buildings can help or hinder human health and wellbeing. Tenants may be wondering what questions to ask building owners and building owners may be curious about what steps to take and which of the various healthy building toolkits to employ. In this episode, Kelly chats with Sarah, Sustainability Director at SWA, about the intersection of health, wellness, and sustainability – or the “triple bottom line” in buildings, and why projects need to take a proactive, holistic approach to all three. Episode Information & Resources 9 Foundations of Healthy Buildings – Harvard School of Public Health Blog: Finding Your Way – Third Party Assurances for Your Properties Blog: Leveraging LEED for New Construction Post-Covid Blog: The Great Indoors: Creating a Healthier and Safer Built Environment Podcast: Human Psychology and the Built Environment with Kristof Erwin Podcast: Healthy & Sustainable Building Materials with Charley Stevenson Podcast: Our Buildings, Our Health We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly: (00:05)Welcome to buildings and beyond, Robb: (00:08)The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment Kelly: (00:12)By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb: (00:17)I’m Robb Aldrich. Kelly: (00:18)And I’m Kelly Westby. Kelly: (00:22)Sarah Nugent helps architects, owners, developers, and building management staff implement a healthy, sustainable, and high performance building strategies on their new construction projects. She has experience with LEED, WELL and Fitwel rating systems. All of which we reference throughout our discussion today, she works on projects from high rise, residential to commercial offices, as well as various other space types, including firehouses and museums. Sarah and I have spoken a few times over the past 18 months about how we make sure that the discussion about health in buildings includes, but is not limited to viral transmission. As we increase office presence this summer and into the fall, can we encourage everyone to think about health holistically? So in this episode, we get into a broad overview of healthy building concepts and the programs that promote them. To start out, Sarah lays the groundwork for what these elements are. Sarah: (01:19)So when you take a step back for all of the different kind of toolkits within healthy buildings certifications, that’s, you know, my background, is in certification programs, be it LEED, WELL, Fitwel, you know, all of these different rating systems, they all kind of focus on kind of their foundations of healthy building, right? That’s also part of public health schools guidelines, you know, the Harvard School of Public Health for example, has nine foundations of healthy buildings, air quality and ventilation, kind of again, main foundations, main backbones, thermal health, moisture, dust and pest, safety and and security, water quality, noise, and lighting and views. Kelly: (02:04)If you already feel overwhelmed, it’s okay. You’re not alone. Sarah highlighted some of the ways the industry has progressed over the last few years Sarah: (02:14)In the beginning of LEED version four, people were really nervous about how the material category was changing. You might remember that where all of the building product disclosure and optimization credits, you know, instead of you looking at recycled content, they looked at these disclosure credits and we were really nervous about them. We just didn’t really see, we didn’t know, well, the market wasn’t there yet. We just really weren’t sure. And now looking back, those credits, like those related to disclosures, which can be both environmental disclosures or health disclosures, it’s ubiquitous. If you aren’t disclosing, you’re not on par with your competitors. In terms of the materials disclosures. So say for example Sherwin-Williams, every paint has disclosures, every single paint in their entire line, right. It’s mainstream manufacturers that are doing these things that we just didn’t know if they would catch up and they really have. And so that’s looking back, we were very nervous in the beginning of LEED v4, cause it was just such a wholesale change and that’s actually been something that all of our projects succeed in just by, you know, being a little thoughtful of course, like during specification period, but I think that that really is the, the mainstream coming into our sector. Right. Disclosures and Kelly: (03:46)Transparency? Sarah: (03:46)Exactly. People want to know what’s going in their building. They want, you know, I do think some of that has to do, you might remember a few years ago when that, like there was that rumor about like Chinese created gypsum board that had formaldehyde in it. Right. And, and I do think that there was a big shift in the manufacturer’s perspective because of that. I do. I really do. Kelly: (04:11)And of course, the global pandemic. Sarah and I talked about the questions that have been on the general population’s mind and in your local news stories, like.. Sarah: (04:23)The air changes Per hour in an MTA train car Kelly: (04:26)The general population now has a vocabulary around ventilation and filtration and Merv 13, and can at least ask about the indoor air quality in their children’s schools or in their offices. And this knowledge is making a difference. Sarah: (04:41)So I had recently saw a statistic that Fitwel’s increase in registrations was like over 200% in the past 12 months. Yeah. They’ve really skyrocketed in terms of their interest and people out registering projects, which is excellent. And again, they’re the center for active design oversees the Fitwel program, but it was created with the GSA and the CDC. Kelly: (05:06)And of course all of these programs are responding directly to this heightened awareness… Sarah: (05:13)All of these major programs LEED, WELL, and Fitwel created response programs to COVID. So they all came out with ways in which buildings could react because at the time there wasn’t really great federal guidance. So they, they said, you know, these are the strategies, like the 20 strategies we would recommend that you implement and that you might have seen the Lady Gaga advertisements for the WELL health safety rating. Yeah. So that’s that program. So for, for re-entry, you know, going back into the building, and saying that you’ve been third party verified that you’re building, you know, implemented these strategies. Kelly: (05:52)So what we’re asking the audience today and the industry is to consider how can we build on this momentum, the poll of early adopters and the increased knowledge of the general public to take a holistic approach to building health. Sarah explains what this would look like in an ideal world. Sarah: (06:11)So my like pie in the sky perfect project would be when we, you know, it’s concept design or schematic design, you know, bring us on as early as possible. And we talk about all these different health metrics alongside the environmental and energy sustainability metrics. Right. That’s my absolute, you know, that would be like the perfect cherry project, right. Because they shouldn’t be after thoughts because it shouldn’t be when the building is getting turned over it that you start thinking about how to implement these strategies. Right. It should be when you are kicking off your project, how are the people who are using this building going to feel right? How are they actually going to be experiencing the building? Kelly: (06:53)But of course the large majority of existing buildings or new construction projects, aren’t starting there, they’re sort of minimally, minimally code compliant, which is actually, you can be less than code compliant because it’s whatever somebody actually enforces in the field. Right. So whatever’s enforced in the field that kind of minimally code compliant and that’s like the standard building. And so the question is, is that what tenants are going to be asking for in the future? And especially kind of in that office space right now, like there are risks associated with holding an office portfolio right now. And how are you setting yourselves apart from your competition? Sarah: (07:36)It’s a great point because, you know, as re-entry starts happening, I mean, our New York city office is talking about going back for the first time in June, right? Like we’ve been out of the office since March of 2020. Phase one, who knows how many people, but right. So that the future of the office is definitely something that’s on everyone’s radar, how dense, right? Like how dense and office is going to be, what the ventilation rates and filtration rates of that space will be? I mean, I do hope that post COVID some of these strategies, or most of these strategies are still maintained. Right. Kelly: (08:10)And so I asked Sarah about where people are trying to get started and where should they get started? People are often looking for a checklist. Right. And in some ways we’ve talked about before people try to look for an equity checklist and then they’re like, okay, I did the equity checklist, so now I’m equitable. And then they put that aside and then they go on with their lives, which is not really working Sarah: (08:35)Nor the point of those checklists Kelly: (08:38)So in what ways do you think the checklist style is working for health and wellness? And in what ways do you think some clients maybe are missing something because they want it to be too prescriptive or, or is that actually the way to go about it for health? Sarah: (08:58)I honestly think that it’s the way to go about it. I do. I do. Because as we’ve, as we’ve discussed, there are so many different elements of health. Right. And so, again, like for so long, we were really focused on just ventilation or just filtration, but there’s so much more. But I think it can be overwhelming. Similarly with when LEED was first created. Right. Like it was overwhelming. People didn’t really know where to begin. So the checklist allows, or these checklist based programs allow you to at least start somewhere. Right. It doesn’t matter exactly where, but at least you’re getting your feet wet. So that’s how, that’s how I see it. And again, like you don’t, you would never need to get certified, but it allows you to say, okay, well, what are we even doing? You know, like what are we actually even implementing in our building? We don’t necessarily need to go through the whole process, but, you know, are we even responding to this topic, you know, of safety and security? Like what are we doing for an emergency situation? Or do we even have a Legionnaires’ plan, you know, for our, for our water systems, they might not. Right. So that’s, that’s also, that’s a precondition for the WELL program is to have a Legionnaires’ safety plan. So it’s things to, you know, to, to really prevent the transmission from the, in the first place, you know? And so I think that that is definitely why it’s a great place to start. Kelly: (10:17)That’s a good point. Not everybody has 30 years to do the research themselves. Sarah: (10:21)Exactly. And, you know, like LEED too they lean on ASHRAE and they lean on the EPA and all of these other organizations and institutions to, to do the research and you cull from those institutions. Right. And then it’s just a toolkit in your toolbox. That’s, that’s how I think of all of the, all of the systems. Yeah. Kelly (10:42)That’s great. So you’ve referenced all of them in this, but give us kind of the basic overview, kind of each one, why you might push a client in one direction versus another, or any other things you think people should consider. Sarah: (10:55)So again, with the background of LEED for new construction, commercial in mind, not residential, anything like that. So I would still say that LEED is the best way to, to start your foray into any of this, because it does touch upon all of them in at least an introductory way. And then you can get deeper, right? So you can still have the sustainability aspects with energy and water reduction and things of that nature, transportation while ensuring that your ventilation is designed correctly, you have the right filtration and you’re you know, if you were to pursue the low emitting material categories then you would be able to have that healthier aspect, to not bring in potential carcinogenic materials. So that’s, you know, just any LEED program while still have all those parameters with the Fitwel program, I would say because it is federally created because it’s connected with the CDC, it a great way for people who are really interested in health, but might not have the upfront capital to install a lot of like more technically or technologically connected items. So, you know, just like the barrier to entry of Fiwel I would say is lower. It still has many, again, these like these 12, most of the there’s different versions of Fitwell based on, you know, you’re building typology or you a community, things of that nature. So there’s still 12 categories related to health based on these seven health impact categories. So you’re still getting a good holistic view of health, but I would say in terms of implementation, you can use it for a new construction project or an existing project. But I think it kind of had existing buildings in mind when it was created, you know, you can implement it with policies and procedures, things of that nature rather than having to overhaul like your air handler or things like that. And then I would say the WELL building standard is pretty technically rigorous in terms of water quality, air quality testing. There’s, I want to say 180 points that you can choose from. They also have, I believe 12 categories, it’s air, water, nourishment, light movement, thermal comfort, sound, materials, mind community. So it’s a lot, you know, it’s very robust. Kelly: (13:28)And they’re more testing based, right? You have to actually, you know, it’s not enough to make a plan. Sarah: (13:33)Correct. Yeah, exactly. It’s not just, you know, I said that I did it, here’s my documentation. The GBCI will go in and do the performance testing, or, you know, you have a testing go in and do the testing to verify that you actually installed low VOC products or that your quality is actually, you know, the PM two point fives are actually below this specific level. Right.…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Incorporating Home and Community in Senior Housing with Valerie Mutterperl May 04, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Valerie Mutterperl, AIA, LEED AP Valerie is an Associate Principal with more than twenty years of experience in senior living and other large-scale projects. Since joining Perkins Eastman, Valerie has been involved in a variety of projects across the spectrum of senior living design, including affordable housing, skilled care, and assisted and independent living, either as stand-alone projects or as part of a life plan community. Drawing on her experience with multifaceted and complex projects, Valerie is able to create positive design outcomes for clients that meet the highest standards. What role do designers, providers, and policymakers play in making senior living communities more vibrant and supportive for older adult residents? How do these spaces enhance the experience of those living, working, and visiting the residence? In this month’s episode we chat with Valerie Mutterperl about her experience in senior living design, and the importance of community within senior living. With a growing aging population, and more families seeking senior housing solutions, these conversations are more important than ever. Episode Information & Resources Perkins Eastman Senior Living Research Podcast Perkins Eastman Insights (filter by ‘Senior Living’) Perkins Eastman White Papers (filter by ‘Senior Living’) The 3 Most Important Design and Construction Considerations for Senior Living Facilities – SWA blog We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly: (00:05)Welcome to buildings and beyond. Robb: (00:08)The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment Kelly: (00:12)By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb: (00:17)I’m Robb Aldrich, Kelly: (00:18)And I’m Kelly Westby. Robb: (00:21)In this episode, I spoke with Valerie Mutterperl who’s an architect with Perkins Eastman based in New York. And she specializes in senior living facilities, many types of senior living facilities, which we’ll get into a little bit. She explained really well I thought, how she got interested in architecture, architecture in general and senior living in particular. Valerie: (00:44)I mean, the reason I went into architecture is because I felt how spaces made me feel. I was aware about how spaces made me feel, and I wanted to be able to help shape that experience for other people, whether it was senior living or a school or an office building. And so taking the ideas of natural light or comfort or scale, what’s the scale of a space? Do I feel really small in this space or do I feel, you know, is it the right size for me? Does it make me feel uncomfortable because of the proportions of the room or is the ceiling height, you know, intentionally large because I’m supposed to feel odd by the space and, and wander, or is this just my living room and I want to be comfortable in it. So I think, you know, thinking about those ideas as an architect and thinking about how to translate those ideas into somebody’s home. And I’m not talking about a private family home because we’re talking about senior living communities, talking about buildings that can often be quite big, but they have to function as somebody’s home. So how do you translate those proportions and the scale and the feeling of a home into a building, which is a community. Robb: (02:16)As you’ll probably be able to tell from my questions, this is not an area where I have a lot of experience or expertise, but Valerie clearly does, she is clearly an expert in this area. And I really appreciated her very thoughtful answers to my somewhat naive questions before we get into it. Here’s a quick announcement from Dylan about NESEA’s upcoming building energy conference. Speaker 1: (02:42)Hello everyone. This is Dylan Martello co-producer of buildings and beyond and a passive house consultant here at Steven winter associates. I just wanted to let you all know about my upcoming session on May 7th at the building energy Boston conference. I will be speaking with my colleague, Nicole Ceci about de-carbonizing domestic water heating in multifamily buildings. You can also catch some other great presentations from industry experts, including sessions by Lois Arena and Lauren Hildebrand of SWA. The conference, which is happening virtually from May 5th to May 7th is presented by the Northeast sustainable energy association, or NESEA. NESEA has become a staple for professionals and practitioners in the fields of high performance, building energy efficiency and renewable energy visit nesea.org. That’s N E S E A.org for more info. We hope to see you there. Robb: (03:38)My first question is, do you focus primarily or only on senior housing or is it, is this just one of your areas of expertise? Valerie: (03:50)So good question. I primarily focus on senior living at Perkins Eastman. I have been fortunate enough to work in many different practice areas throughout my career. However, when I joined Perkins Eastman, that became sort of my specialty focus and it’s a great practice area because it encompasses so many things that people don’t think about. It encompasses master planning often. There can be healthcare components, there can be all sorts of educational components or residential living. So it, it gives one the ability to poke their fingers into lots of different places, always keeps things interesting and exciting. And it’s it’s actually been a practice area that I’ve I’ve had throughout my career, no matter what firm I’ve been with. So it’s really, and it’s changed. So it’s exciting. Robb: (04:51)Yeah. How did you first get involved or interested in it? Was that accidental? Valerie: (04:58)Yeah, when you’re a junior right out of grad school, you work on whatever they throw your way. And the first project I worked on actually was a nursing home out in Jersey city, it had a particular mission to serve residents of the blind and it was a religious organization. So they preferenced taking residents in that had visual impairment in one shape or form. And the original project I went with my, my boss at the time because the administrator wanted to redo the beauty shop and that turned into a whole two additions to their existing building because it became evident that to provide the level of care that they were interested in providing that their facility was very outdated. For instance, they had four bedded rooms with residents, no private bathrooms. Those are things that can’t do code wise, nor would you want to do them because of just the wellness of the residents and their mental and physical wellbeing and sort of their sense of, of being in a home rather than being in an institution. So there are many parts of senior living. It’s a continuum of care, which ranges all the way from residential for very independent, you know, 55 plus age restricted communities. I’m sure you see them popping up all over the place near where you live. Through, you know, assisted living where people maybe need some, some help with activities of daily living is what we call them. ADL’s, maybe pill reminders, maybe help getting dressed, but can mostly live independently. Through some of the more clinical settings like nursing care or hospice care end of life care. So it’s a continuum and senior living encompasses the broad range of all these things, which could be separate individual pieces, or they could be co located together. Robb: (07:11)And the term senior living versus senior housing, is one preferred? Or do you prefer one? Valerie: (07:18)It’s an interesting question. We have in the senior living practice been talking about, is that the right name for this practice area anymore? Does it need a more modern name in the same way that providers changed from continuing care retirement communities to life plan communities? Do we need a name change? So I don’t know that they are not the same. I don’t know that they’re not synonymous senior housing sounds friendlier to the consumer as well as I think to the children of the potential consumers. So I think that’s an important, important idea and distinction of who our senior living providers marketing too. It’s not just the seniors, but it’s their children too. Robb: (08:17)Yeah. Okay. Interesting. Okay. Valerie: (08:21)Right. Nobody wants to put mom and dad in an institution. You know, they want to partner with mom and dad and have them live, not warehouse them, live someplace that they can live life to their fullest, whatever that may be for them. Robb: (08:43)Yeah. You sent me some background and this is something, this is an area where I haven’t had much experience at all. And if I have, I was probably just in doing blower door tests or consulting about filtration or ventilation, something like that. But you sent me some background material, which I perused and it was really interesting. And really as a designer, I think that the thing that struck me after reading through the material that you sent was just the deliberately trying to make connections or maintain connections of different kinds with the people living in senior housing, or these senior living facilities or whatever people ended up calling them. And just maintaining connections on, on a few different layers. And I think the first one that jumped out to me was, which is kind of obvious, was just connection with the natural world, connection without outdoors, biophilic design. Is that something that your clients ask for specifically, or is that something you usually try to try to push into a project into the design? Valerie: (09:50)I don’t, I can’t recall a client being that specific. There’s a handful that actually know the term biophilia. But it’s a term that we often introduce to take clients beyond the baseline of what you were just talking about, the blower door test and sustainability, you know, most clients today are savvy enough to be able to talk about LEED certification and other sustainable practices in terms of the basis of design, solar orientation, energy consumption, and things like that. I think biophilia is kind of the next step though, when you’re talking qualitatively about the spaces. I mean, not, not just the thermal comfort of the space, because we’ve built a good building that’s well-insulated and can be naturally ventilated and cooled and heated enough in the winter. But talking about a space that has a certain orientation to a view that’s important bringing natural light. And so that there’s wonder, you know, by being able to see a deer walking outside, or maybe you’re in an urban environment and seeing the traffic going by, or the kids going to school or you’re across from a school and you can see them out at lunchtime playing. I think being, being able to bring that environment indoors is also really important for people to understand the time of day and those cues that you get from light from dark. So it seems like it should be a no brainer and inherent in design, just in terms of creating a space and a place that has a connection to your surroundings. But I think it’s important also to have those conversations with clients and make that a priority on the design list so that spaces can benefit from the outside. And, and there’s evidence that, that residents who have that connection are happier and healthier. I mean, I think that goes for all of us in our homes, right. The room that I like to be in the most is the one that’s brightest during the day. Robb: (12:14)Yep. Yeah. I have my coffee every morning in front of a glass sliding glass door. I can watch the birds at the bird feeder. Are there different strategies within senior living facilities for this than other types of buildings you think, or is it just a lot of it is similar as far as the biophilia? Valerie: (12:38)I think it’s similar. I think that there are maybe some considerations or ameliorating factors to take into consideration such as for instance, if a senior is often seated, you know, what is the sill height for that person so that they can get a good view out your view out of a window standing is very different than your view seated. I think also in terms of which way that view is looking and sun glare, potential sun glare versus shade, creating an overhang, creating the architecture so that you don’t get that glare. And it becomes a place where a person can sit by a window and, and be outside and have that connection to nature is also really important. It’s better for the building. It’s better for the person, but I think in addition, looking for opportunities, not just within the building, but for people to go out and engage with nature and have those experiences is equally important, having a garden or having, having a space where they can sit outside, which maybe had a generous overhang or a pergola or something like that, so that you can not just visually see things from inside, but be outdoors. Robb: (14:08)Yup. And maybe it goes right along with it, like connection to the community. Something that seems obvious. But when I was going through the material that you sent, I thought of my, my uncle who lives in, I think you would call it independent living facility. So it’s an apartment. It’s not assisted living. It’s not nursing, but there’s common meals and such, but that facility is it’s, it’s very much separate, you know, it’s, it’s back on its own plot of land set back from the road, not part of a town or village or anything it’s, it’s feels very, it feels pretty secluded to me. And I think there’s a sidewalk, there are some paths where he could walk a quarter to a Dunkin Donuts or something, but I mean, that’s, that’s where the land was. There are probably advantages actually to being somewhat set back from a busy road. But as a designer, what do you think about in trying to kind of maintain not seclusion, but more integration with the community. Valerie: (15:15)Yeah. That’s a big topic with a lot of layers to peel back. I mean, look, honestly, the ideal scenario is when you have a client and they’re looking for a piece of property that they would engage us early enough, that we could really delve into some of that, but oftentimes your clients come to you with an idea or a parcel of land that they’ve purchased. I think traditionally many of these senior living communities have been located where there’s a lot of, a lot of space to build in general. Right. and so, so, and people can spread out and the cost of building is, is less than in an urban dense environment. But I think also that comes with advantages and disadvantages. The discussion there is about creating community in this, in this place that you’re building. Right. So how do you create a community amongst the residents that are all going to move in to the independent living community? And oftentimes that’s through commons, which has social functions, wellness functions, you know, aquatics or a gym or a multipurpose room or auditorium, where there can be educational programs for them to engage with. And the residents usually band together and create their own sorts of gardening clubs and all sorts of things. And that, that really comes out of the people that are living there and what their interests are. But there are a lot of providers, depending on their location that have also looked to extend their reach into the greater surrounding community, rather than having their independent living community kind of be an Island o…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Building Comradery with Steven Winter Apr 20, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Steven Winter, FAIA Steven Winter is the founder and chairman of Steven Winter Associates, Inc. He has been at the forefront of the sustainable/green building movement since its inception, helping lead the U.S. Green Building Council organization as Chairman with the launch of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) program and Greenbuild. Steven is still a current Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, where he serves on the sustainable buildings steering industry. Comradery [käm-ˌra-d(ə-)rē] noun 1 A feeling of friendliness, goodwill, and familiarity among the people in a group. At SWA, comradery is etched into our company principles – friendliness and community have been key parts of SWA’s business since the company was born. At the end of the day, we are all trying to make the world a more sustainable and equitable place. But what is the value in having close working relationships with colleagues, clients, and even competitors? In this episode, we sit down with Steven Winter (yes, THE Steven Winter), to talk about comradery – both within SWA and the industry as a whole, and how it has helped us remain successful through day-to-day operations, major company transitions, and even a global pandemic. We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly (00:06):Welcome to buildings and beyond, Robb (00:09:the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment, Kelly (00:13):by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:18):I’m Robb Aldrich, Kelly (00:19):and I’m Kelly Westby. Robb (00:22):In this episode, I talked with Steven Winter, the one and only. We’ve been talking about having Steven on for quite a while, and we asked him if there was a topic that he really wanted to talk about. He started our company, Steven winter associates, back in 1972. He’s been at this quite awhile. He’s seen a lot of trends and fads in the building industry, and he’s a pretty good prognosticator, but he didn’t want to talk about any of that. He wanted to talk about people, about comradery and community in the workplace. So this episode is pretty different than others we’ve done before. Before we get into it, here’s a quick announcement from Dylan about NESEA’s upcoming building energy conference. Dylan (01:08):Hello everyone. This is Dylan Martello, co-producer of buildings and beyond, and a passive house consultant here at Steven winter associates. I just wanted to let you all know about my upcoming session on May 7th at the Building Energy Boston conference. I will be speaking with my colleague, Nicole Ceci about de-carbonizing domestic water heating in multifamily buildings. You can also catch some other great presentations from industry experts, including sessions by Lois Arena and Lauren Hildebrand of SWA. The conference, which is happening virtually from May 5th to may 7th, is presented by the Northeast sustainable energy association, or NESEA. NESEA has become a staple for professionals and practitioners in the fields of high-performance building, energy efficiency, and renewable energy. Visit NESEA.org. That’s N E S E A.org, for more info. We hope to see you there. Robb (02:02):There’s no question that COVID inspired Steven’s choice of a topic for this episode. Steven (02:08):It totally is because of COVID. Robb (02:11):Throughout our conversations, Steven refers a few times to our company principles. A few years ago because the company has kept growing steadily, It was determined that it would behoove us to formalize principles that guide our work and guide our company. I’ll mention them very briefly here: be visionary, take ownership, think holistically, improve the built environment, and last but not least – Steven (02:41):Foster comradery, or camaraderie – engage with one another to build community. And, and this, this is an important part of our foundation and it’s something we have been practicing, but it’s nebulous thing that’s out there, that lives out there. And I thought it was, it might be something worth spending a few minutes talking about. Robb (03:10):Has that been really part of your thinking going way back? I mean, starting the company, building the company, just good relationships with colleagues? Steven (03:21):It’s always been that way. We’ve always been from day one. I, and the staff, which were just one or two to start with and then grew over time, we’ve always been friends in addition to being colleagues. Robb (03:38):So does it happen automatically? I mean, over the years, how much thought do you give when you’re hiring, when you’re recruiting? Do you pick people based on, you know, I think I’d really like this person, like to work with this person, like to hang out with this person, can you pick people? Is that something that you can judge when you’re, when you’re hiring, when you’re building a team? Steven (04:05):Well current HR policy may not agree with this, but, but the simplest answer is yes. Part of the evaluation of an individual, when I was hiring people, I was doing the interviewing, did include an element of their character that was based on how likable they are. I liked you when we were interviewing, and it seems to me that if I found you likable, clients would find you likable. And, and in my experience, companies, potential clients, they don’t hire us only for the technical capabilities that we have, they hire us as people, they hire us because of the people we are and who we are as individuals and characters. Robb (05:07):And how about clients? I mean, we’ve all worked with all kinds of clients over the years. Some you love to work with, some you dread just making a simple phone call. It’s like, Oh my God, I got to talk to this person again. Do you pick clients based on good working relationships? Steven (05:26):There’s no question about it. Not only the one-on-one business relationship, where we’re undertaking contractual work, but also business relationships at trade shows and conferences. There’s the socializing aspect of those gatherings leads to closer and closer ties and relationships with those individuals even with competitors. Robb (05:59):Yeah I had a hard time getting excited for virtual conferences, and I think, you know, some of this is your influence. When I started working for you, I’d go to conferences. And I just go to all the sessions. If there was a session happening, I was sitting in the seat watching, you know, listening to whoever is talking. Now I might go to one or two sessions, and I’m on the trade show. And you know, I’m talking to, I’m talking to vendors, I’m talking to people, I’m talking to colleagues, I’m talking to competitors, like you say. And that, to me, I think you’ve taught me is the, that’s the value, not only do you develop business relationships and generate business, but that’s how I learn. I learned way more, just talking to people on the trade show, trade show floor, then sitting in a seat in a session. Steven (06:50):The NESEA conferences that we went to for, you know, decades, is a case in point. You and I were both at those things and look at the relationships that have come out of that. We’ve hired people as a result of those relationships. We’ve gotten our CEO. And you couldn’t do that virtually, but there’s an element of comradery that resulted in those hirings and in those businesses won and lost. It does stem in some measurable part to the fact that we are comrades with those people that we mix with. Robb (07:37):One of the other things that I was chewing on was that so many people that work at SWA are almost uniformly pretty passionate about buildings, about certain aspects of buildings, good buildings, resilient, accessible, healthy, et cetera. I think that contributes to the community, to the comradery, do you agree? And even if you don’t agree, how do you find people? How do you attract people that really are interested? And I would say passionate, a lot of us are pretty passionate about our work. Steven (08:18):So, okay. A lot of people out there in the world are passionate about their work. In our shop, they’re also passionate about, about their work. That’s cool. That’s good. They’re passionate about the work, but comradery means going one step further, that they are collaborating in their passion, that they are like holding hands, intellectually, in pursuing their passion. And at the same time, they are being friendly to each other, supportive to each other, planning things with each other, that are social as well as business oriented. So it’s passion plus. Passion for the work, plus a feeling of collegiality or friendliness towards one another. That’s the camaraderie part. Robb (09:14):But I don’t think they go together to a certain degree? Steven (09:19):Well, well, maybe in our shop, I hope that happens, but you can have a dysfunctional company where individuals hate their job and they’re not passionate about their profession, but they have fun together. Right. They have camaraderie. Robb (09:39):Well, maybe they have comradery after work, but not during work. Steven (09:43):Oh, maybe not, but okay. Let’s agree to disagree. I, I don’t think that necessarily passion for a professional pursuit necessarily equates to comradery with each other. You know, we can talk about that. Like the three of us have been out socially, we’ve been at events where it’s a birthday party for someone in the office or we have empathy for each other when bad things happen and support for each other. But that has, doesn’t tie into the fact that you and you and I passionate about the work that we do. It’s sorta maybe kind of relates, but it’s not a one-to-one relationship. Robb (10:45):Okay. That’s interesting. When I started, I was, and I remain just really so appreciative of just amazing expertise that we have at Steven winter associates, you know, technical expertise, people know about buildings. It’s, it’s phenomenal. And it used to be, if I ever wanted to know before, before COVID, when I could walk down the hall and ask people, if I had a question about buildings, I’d walk down the hall and ask somebody about it. You know, I wouldn’t Google it. I’d walk down the hall and ask somebody about whatever I was interested in. And, and I, it occurs to me it’s certainly, you know, shared interests, shared passions certainly doesn’t equate to comradery, for sure. I mean, you can have people that are in the same field that absolutely despise each other, we’ve all read, you know Tesla Edison kind of thing, or, you know, something extreme like that. But like, like an example, like I’ve asked so many people when I’m doing home improvements to my own home I’ll ask experts in our shop about installation details or things like that. And not only do we have like, leaders in the field, but people that are just genuinely happy to help, just friendly and happy to help, it seems like it, it seems like it, it goes together. Steven (12:20):Yeah. The happy to help part, as I say, it fits into the comradery part. But just remember the definition that I’m, I’m trying to come back to is that comradery is a feeling of friendliness, Goodwill, and familiarity among people in a group that doesn’t mean like top of their profession. It doesn’t mean really smart. It means, you know, friendly, you know, comrades. Robb (12:54):Buddies. I get it. All right. It’s interesting. I was thinking that shared interests and passions can lead to increased comradery, but it sounds like you, you don’t see that bigger connection. Steven (13:10):I, you know, we can go back to the framers of the constitution. I was not there when the August group met to determine what our company principles should be, but they came up with fostering camaraderie and, and how they built on that, how they determined, what that would be is, is something I’m not privy to, that the wording they came up with was engage with one another to build community. And our community is our company. And, and I, I guess, but the, but the excellence, the, the, the shared excellence doesn’t sort of equate, I don’t think. Robb (13:56):Okay. Interesting. Okay. Steven (13:59):Can I, can I share with you some examples? Robb (14:02):Yeah, absolutely. Please. Steven (14:04):We used to have company picnics. We still have company picnics when we were small enough to fit every employee and his, or her family into one yard. And that was, that was on a Saturday. It was not on company time. No one got paid to be there. And, and they, they did it willingly. They, they went willingly and they, they shared good times. And they that was comradeship. That was, that was that was camaraderie. They go to each other’s weddings. They go camping and climbing and kayaking with each other. They take vacation trips together and we have the occasional union amongst consenting couples here. And that’s, that’s the that’s that familial, familial family type support, and, and reinforcement of each other at the personal level. Within the context of being members of the same company. And I have to tell you what it does do, it results in trust of each other. It, it it means that people will go the extra mile for each other. It, it means that they, they become lifelong friends. We have more alumni friends than we do staff by a factor of 20 or 30. Because those relationships that have been built are ongoing, that they’ve been established and built, and they’re ongoing. Robb (15:54):So is it, I mean, in your view, is this element of comradery? I mean, the examples you gave were kind of extracurricular. But not, not during work, not during, not nine to five. Steven (16:10):So those were examples that were, that were extracurricular. It’s true. In the nine to five context, there’s not that much time available for comradery to take place. Robb (16:28):I disagree with that. Well, I mean, just, just this just great working relationships. I mean, just if you have, if you build trust and you have great relationships, and I think shared interests and passions can be a strong element in, in some relationships, you know, working together to, to meet a deadline, to get a proposal out, to bring the pieces of a project together. There are so many times where I’ve worked so closely with, with folks at SWA to, to put the pieces of projects together in a, in a really concerted focused manner that, that it doesn’t always work seamlessly, but, they want to see it. They want to make it happen. they’re not just putting in, you know, putting in the hours, we have really kind of committed people. And I think part of that is part of that is being professional and doing what they are getting paid for. But part of it is just supporting each other supporting coworkers. Steven (17:45):I, I agree that that is camaraderie that, that counts as camaraderie I don’t think that the, the excellence, however, does tie-in. I mean, anyway, look, we’re, we’re counting gnats on the back of an elephant here. Robb (18:04):Yeah. Yeah. So, all right, so this, this will be a stretch, but one thing that I wanted to bring up, and one of the other other podcasts team folks brought up was, was I think maybe even during my interview with you quite a while ago, you told me, you know, you give people plenty of rope. If they’re interested in something, if they have a passion to do projects, you know, you give them the bandwidth to go out, get clients, get projects,…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Electrification Nation with Laura Tajima Mar 03, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Laura Tajima Laura Tajima works across many of Building Electrification Institute’s cities overseeing and implementing projects to advance equitable building electrification. Laura was previously with the NYC Mayor’s Office of Sustainability, where she worked on policies and programs to decarbonize buildings and often led the office’s technical analysis and research. Laura has a Master of Science in Sustainability Management from Columbia University. Cities across North America are paving the way for wide-spread building electrification. Although there are many benefits associated with going all-electric, there are also many barriers that stand in the way. Building Electrification Institute acts as resource for cities in their equitable transition to building electrification through education, training, and program support. They work with 11 different cities, providing them with the necessary “tools in their toolbox” to ensure their buildings are as energy efficient, healthy, equitable, and cost effective as they need to be. In this episode, our host Robb and guest Laura talk about electrification strategies, costs, and the importance of policy as it relates to building electrification and climate goals in cities. Episode Information & Resources Pragmatists for Clean Air– https://pragmatistsforcleanair.org/ An open source project for all-electric buildings in Utah supporting building professionals with plans and data on all-electric construction. The Greenlining Institute– https://greenlining.org/ An organization focused on racial and economic justice, including working on the challenges and opportunities that building electrification presents for low-income communities. Emerald Cities Collaborative– https://emeraldcities.org/ National non-profit working to create high-road local economies, including developing programs and initiatives around building electrification, training, and transitioning the workforce. Inclusive Economics– https://inclusiveecon.com/ Organization providing research on the employment, economic, equity impacts of energy transitions and climate policies. They have a great study on the employment impacts of building decarbonization in California. Zero Cities Project (USDN) – https://www.usdn.org/projects/zero-cities-project.html A project to develop actionable and equitable roadmaps with 11 leading cities. This page includes resources, case studies, and videos featuring the work of cities and community partners. We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Robb (00:05):Welcome to buildings and beyond. Robb (00:08):The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment. Kelly (00:12):By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:17):I’m Robb Aldrich. Kelly (00:18):And I’m Kelly Westby. Robb (00:22):In this episode, I spoke with Laura Tajima at the building electrification Institute or BEI. Bei supports cities around the country that are trying to electrify their building stock. Back in 2019, my co-host Kelly interviewed Lori Kerr about climate policy in cities and building electrification was one of three or four key pathways that cities need to pursue to reach their climate goals. As electricity gets cleaner and cleaner, moving away from fossil fuels and towards efficient heat pumps can make a lot of sense. Laura herself lives in Colorado, but BEI works all across the country. One of my first questions was where exactly they’re working now. Laura (01:15):Yeah. So right now we’re working in about three different regions. So we work in the East coast – New York city being one of them, Burlington, Boston, Washington, DC. We were in the Rocky mountain area. So salt Lake city, Denver, and Boulder. And then we have some California cities as well, too. San Jose, LA, Berkeley. Robb (01:39):So I kind of put Laura on the spot for that question to list all the cities that we’re working with. And she realized later on that she forgot to list to Philadelphia. So you can add Philadelphia to the list. Laura herself started out working in international affairs and education. She went back to grad school for sustainability management and she got her first taste of meaningful climate policy work at the New York city mayor’s office. Laura (02:07):I started working with the New York city mayor’s office of sustainability initially as like, you know, an intern and loved that idea of the big thinking, you know, being really ambitious, but also kind of having the connection to, you know, local people, local issues, being able to really kind of impact policy that that could change how people are building buildings, change how people are operating them. You know, thinking about programs and supportive trainings and education to kind of help people understand these concepts as well, too. So it was really invigorating and exciting to kind of work on the policies, policy component of things really understanding kind of the, the breadth by which you can really impact the future. Robb (02:57):Cool. One of the big initiatives that some cities have played with, which certainly gets lots of press, even in mainstream press, is, is gas bans, natural gas bans. You said you work with Berkeley and Berkeley was, was one of the cities that maybe kicked that off. Can you talk about how, how those work or how cities came about to kind of do something that seems pretty draconian to a lot of people? Laura (03:28):Gas bans often kind of get a lot of misconceptions around it. I think that, you know, a lot of people think that this means that, Oh, you know, the city is coming in and gonna take away my gas stove that I’ve been, you know, working with for the last year 20 years. You know, I think that `we see cities kind of leading in this concept is, is really around, you know, requiring electrification where it makes the most sense. So this does make sense in new construction today. I think that we see that building electrification in new construction can be built less expensive compared to a mixed fuel building. And, you know, can have that really tight envelope in order to make sense for building electrification. And also people are becoming more and more aware of the impacts of gas particularly on health, particularly from cooking. And so, you know, as a result we’ve seen kind of these really strong examples of people leading with building electrification in new construction. I mean, we see this of course in areas like New York city. But we also see in places like, you know, salt Lake city and there’s this awesome organization called Pragmatists for clean air, and they are making all of their plan sites, review process, you know, open source, they’re sharing their costs, they’re sharing their data. So we’ve seen kind of that works in new construction, that building electrification works in new construction. I think as a result, you know, the cities are kind of saying this is a win-win, you know, people get a better home. People get cooling, people get, you know, cleaner cooking, cleaner appliances. This is lower cost to build. Why are we not saying you should go all electric in new construction? And so that’s what we’re seeing. You know, we’re seeing cities that are either saying we’re going to outright require it in certain buildings. We’re seeing cities saying we’re going to require it for, you know heating and cooling and hot water, but maybe, you know, they’re going to allow exceptions for cooking or gas fireplaces. Sometimes they’re allowing exceptions for that as well too. But we’re really seeing that kind of saying this just makes sense. And we just need to make sure that we are, we are going in that direction, our buildings that we’re building today that are going to be around for however many years in the future are kind of the best, the cleanest, the most cost-effective as well as the healthiest. Robb (05:56):So on the gas bans, were all the gas bans that different cities have had enacted or thought about really just for new construction? Laura (06:07):Yes. I think that those that have passed to my knowledge, have all been really kind of focused on requiring a level of of electric within new construction buildings. I don’t believe that any of them have considered major renovations, but, but i could be wrong on that one. If it is, it would be only looking at major renovations. I think that there is a little bit of difference with like the gas moratoriums that we saw in New York that were more driven from the gas utility side, rather than like the city local government side. I believe that did have an impact on existing buildings. But that really came out of kind of a constraint on the supply side, while the local governments in their terms of their policies mostly are really much really focusing on requiring all electric to some extent, as I said, in, in new construction. Robb (07:03):Okay. All right. And, you got into this a little bit, Are, are they differentiating? I mean, I’m with you, for say single family, new construction, single family homes, anything, but all electric just doesn’t make sense to me anymore, but when you get into restaurants or, you know, places with commercial kitchens with big intense thermal loads you know, Berkeley and Brookline, Massachusetts are the two kind of that come to mind for me. Did they put in exceptions for, for say kitchens for restaurants, or was it much more a kind of blanket ban? Laura (07:47):Brookline actually did a fair bit of stakeholder engagement as I’ve heard with the restaurant industry. And they brought up real concerns about having electric alternatives for some of their, you know, restaurant specialty kind of type of cooking. And so that they allowed commercial cooking and might’ve even allowed residential cooking to be gas in terms of their requirements around all electric. So there’s definitely different flavors if you will, of all electric requirements. And that’s why I keep on saying like, there there’s that variety, you know, some are saying this is only going to be residential. Some are saying, we’re going to allow for residential cooking. We’re going to allow for gas fireplaces, we’re going to allow for you know, domestic hot water in multi-family buildings. So again, I think that there are nuances to these and that’s what I think that is often missed a little bit within the press that you know, I think that the local governments, they work closely with their stakeholders. They are kind of the closest government that understands their, their constituents. So, you know, a lot of times that while they do want to be aggressive and ambitious with our goals, they also of course want something practical. So, you know, they, they try to kind of really balance that out. And, and so they’re not going to try to kind of put something forward that is completely impractical often. So, so again, I think those exceptions do really exist when, when they’re considering these types of policies. Robb (09:20):Cool. Cool. And what else on the new construction side, what, what kind of innovative strategies have you seen people try that either have worked, or you’re really interested to see how well they work other than something, you know, press grabbing headlines like gas bans? Laura (09:40):As I mentioned, it kind of is this, this cycle, I would say where there are pilot projects that you can really kind of highlight and demonstrate, and this might be through, you know, buildings of excellence type of you know, marketing and awareness and awards. It might be also education around kind of the health impacts of gas appliances as well, too. And we’ve seen different kind of organizations and partnerships with health groups and other local like community groups in order to kind of help bring out that messaging around the health impacts. You know, and then of course we’ve seen really kind of some, some leading developers, as I mentioned lead in terms of showing kind of how that they can do it and showing the data showing the analysis that goes behind it. And so I think that that pilot project kind of component has been really successful and sharing kind of information has been really successful. And now we’re seeing people transition into that, that requirements. You know, I think that, that there are kind of the requirements of saying how you can build, but there’s also kind of the I guess, financial components as well, too. And so, you know, are some places such as, as Seattle is looking at kind of how do we tax the, the oil that is being used for heating and hot water in order to kind of use that as a financial driver for people to kind of continue to looking at electrification but also using that funding to really make sure that it’s going to, you know, low-income housing to kind of support electrification there, where again, it has often the biggest impact and health and safety, but I will say that, you know, part of this is also kind of making sure that these local governments have all of these tools in their toolbox. And what we’ve seen across the country is actually this growing number. And I believe it’s up to 10 right now of state ballot measures or state legislation that actually would prohibit any kind of all electric requirement in local governments. Started with Arizona. It passed super quick in Arizona, but now we’re seeing across the country it was introduced in Colorado, it’s in Utah. I believe it was introduced in Mississippi, a number of them that are happening oftentimes of really similar language. So there’s kind of some, some questions about, you know, oil and gas kind of industries behind a lot of these components and influence state legislatures, but this would restrict the local governments ability to kind of pass these really ambitious policies that I mentioned really impact and improve the lives of the people living in these buildings. So that is something that I think that, that as, you said, like, you know, the gas ban press kind of gets wider as local governments get more ambitious. What they’re also going to be experiencing is this backlash, particularly from the oil and gas industry. And so now local governments are trying to figure out how to band together, how to get op-eds in there, how to kind of change the conversation in order to galvanize against kind of these, you know, immediate impacts of, of these, these gas ban prohibition legislation that’s happening at the state level. Robb (12:58):Wow. So something to stay tuned to probably there. Interesting, well, all the gas bands and the really all electric requirements are really focused on new construction. In my experience, existing buildings are much different and larger challenge. What, what are you seeing on that front? If anything Laura (13:24):Existing buildings are definitely more challenging. Retrofits of any kind are hard in existing buildings compared to new construction. And of course building electrification is no exception. And it has, of course, these additional layers of complexities. As I mentioned, kind of that cycle of like pilot projects, education, outreach, marketing, and then kind of requirements, I would still, I would say that for the most part, existing buildings are kind of still in that kind of line of how do we make sure that there’s more examples out there today of this being done successfully of this having real impacts on the tenants and r…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    It’s Time to 86 Fossil Fuels in Commercial Kitchens with Chris Galarza Feb 05, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Chef Christopher Galarza Chef Christopher Galarza is the Owner and Culinary Sustainability Consultant at Forward Dining Solutions, LLC. Chris founded his company in hopes to educate the world about the electrification of kitchen systems and alternative cooking technologies, and to push sustainable cooking practices into the mainstream consciousness. Chris sits on the Advisory Board for Pittsburgh Technical College’s Culinary Program, is a Member of La Confrérie de la Chaîne des Rôtisseurs, and currently is working with Interface Engineering on a project for Microsoft! Read more Imagine this: you’re a chef or cook in a high-stress commercial kitchen setting. You’re making split second decisions with little breathing room, and each quick decision can get you cut or burned. On top of that, you’re in over 100-degree heat, breathing in toxic air from your gas stovetop. This is an experience Chris Galarza could relate to, from working as a professional chef in various commercial settings. After making the switch to an all-electric kitchen utilizing induction equipment at Chatham University’s Eden Hall campus (the world’s first fully self-sustained university campus), he witnessed the positive difference in the physical and mental health of himself and his staff. He now advocates for electric cooking being a much healthier, safer, cost-effective, and energy-efficient option. In this episode, Kelly and Chris talk through some electric-kitchen-myth-busting, and ultimately answer the question “is moving away from gas and fire in the kitchen really that radical an idea or does it just make perfect sense?” Episode Information & Resources ASHRAE RP-1469 Thermal Comfort in Commercial Kitchens Video: Induction Mythbusting – Sautéing We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly (00:05):Welcome to buildings and beyond. Robb (00:08):The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment, Kelly (00:12):by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:17):I’m Robb Aldrich. Kelly (00:18):and I’m Kelly Westby. Chris (00:23):I may not be the person that changes the world, but I hope to inspire the person that can. Kelly (00:29):That was chef Chris Galarza. I happened across Chris virtually after my colleague, Karla and his friend, Rachelle Boucher at Kitchens to Life presented a cooking demonstration for residential induction cooking. Seeing Chris’s impressive background and passion for sustainable food prep, I knew we had to have him on the podcast. Chef Chris is a culinary sustainability consultant and the owner of Foward Dining Solutions. Chris holds a bachelor’s degree in culinary management by age 23, Chris was acting chef at Monterey Bay fish grotto. The number one seafood restaurant in Pittsburgh. He has been opening sous chef for off the hook. The catering chef for Carnegie Mellon university and was chosen over thousands as one of 12 culinary apprentices at the prestigious Green Briar resort. Chris then helped create and lead the kitchen at Chatham university’s Eden hall campus. Chris (01:23):Which is the first fully self-sustained university campus in the world. And it has one of America’s first, all electric kitchens, boasting induction ranges, electric flat tops, electric ovens, steamers, tilt skillets. You think it, you name it. We got it. We had a farm that had 30 plus acres in cultivation. We tapped our own trees for maple syrup, raised our own bees and trout, our own orchard mushrooms. We did everything we could, and it was a culinary playground If you will. Kelly (02:02):Chris is now dedicated to creating sustainable culinary playgrounds for other chefs across the country, but he wasn’t always so focused on sustainability. Chris (02:12):My journey through sustainability, kind of the seeds were planted in culinary school when my professor, her name was Sally Fry. And I say her name because she was the one that even brought up the term sustainability, what it means, how important it is. And I thought it was a, it was a cool thing as like a fad, like, okay, cool. That’s really cool. Trying to give back to the earth. I get it. And then when I got to Chatham university, I really fell in love with the concepts, with what it took to be sustainable, how important it was. You know, I developed my own definition of sustainability. Like what it meant to me. And to me, sustainability is to give back to the earth as much as you take from it. And right now that’s not happening. So I tried to try to use up the ingredients as best I could try to compost everything we could. If something was deemed trash, try to find another life for it. And from there just embracing the electric kitchen, which at first I was hesitant about. And now, I mean, obviously it’s inspired me to create my own consulting company where, you know, although we consult on any, any number of projects on regular gas kitchens, I really love to consult and push people towards the electric kitchens. There’s no real experts out there on the commercial sense. So I’m hoping to help nudge the culinary landscape in that direction. And what also helped inspired this, I guess, business is that I’ve had people reach out and ask me questions about what it takes to run an electric kitchen. What is an electric kitchen? How do you work in this space that really is foreign to the Americans. And then through research, finding out that most of the world is already on board. So I started seeing a gap in knowledge where American chefs are behind their European, Australian and Asian counterparts because they’re using these technologies that they’ve had it for over a decade, almost two decades in some, in some places. And at some point like American chefs are going to start becoming less desired where we once were the gold standard. So it was a combination of all those things that helped lead me to the path where this is important. Kelly (04:42):That’s awesome. That’s a great sentiment. And I love what you mentioned about using up everything you can in the kitchen. I think it speaks to sustainability in a different way, but it’s definitely the angle that I personally have felt attracted me to sustainability. You know, why are we wasting so many things? How can we cut waste? So I’d love if you could give everybody an example, just to see us in your chef hat, a little bit of where you reused sort of something that other people thought was, was waste. Chris (05:14):So I’ll go real quick to when, when I used to teach kids, I used to teach a bunch of high school kids who would come through once a year to the campus. And we would have this one day where they were going to the garden, they’d pick all the produce, they’d bring it to me. I’d clean it and make sure it’s all ready to go. And I would teach them a three hour course in how to identify fresh fish, how to break down fresh fish and what to do with it. So we would break down this fish, you would have this carcass and most people would just throw away. What I did was I made a, I made a fish stock. And then while they were, you know, while we were going through the class, the fish stock was going, I took their vegetable scraps that would also thrown away toss that into the fish stock. While the fish stock was continuing to simmer, we cooked their meal, they’d sit down and eat, I’d at that point, have them collect their scraps, bring it up. We would discuss what you can do with the fish stock. We can just have them smell it, look at it, identify the characteristics of a good stock and then have them taste it and how bland it could be possibilities of what, of what it could be. And then we would strain it and it make soup with it. So in that one, three hour class, I’d show them how to take this, this animal who for all intensive purposes died and we’re lucky enough to receive those nutrients. And it’s incumbent on us to make sure that that animal has the utmost respect and is used to the fullest extent of our ability. So we were able to eat its flesh. We were able to make a broth from their bones, instead of throwing out the leftovers, turning into soup and having another meal with it. So that fish sustained us for two, three different meals. And that’s kinda like the best example of using up these ingredients that will be tossed away. Other things we’ve done is pickled pineapple stems or pineapple cores rather it pickles. It pickles fantastic, you wouldn’t think so, but it breaks down the, the fiberous core. It has an amazing crunch. It’s sweet. It’s acidic. It’s fantastic. And then from there we’ve also turned like carrot peels and, you know, leftover stuff from like near par soup production and we grind that up and pickle that, and then we’d have, you know, a relish. Yeah. So there’s a million things you can do with with food. Kelly (07:46):Yeah, that’s so great. I always feel guilty throwing things away. So I recently we made Apple peel chips and they were absolutely delicious. So you’ve definitely inspired me. I never knew what to do with pineapple cores. So there you go. Chris (08:00):I’ve also made a salmon crackers from salmon skin. That was a lot of fun. You take the skin, dehydrate it, you fry it. And, and really about 400 degrees Fahrenheit and it puffs up like a cracker. Kelly (08:13):Nice. All of those sound delicious. And I think when people think of you know, sustainability, that would be perfectly aligned with chefs, it would be kind of using all of the ingredients. Not that everybody does, but of course, it’s more cost-effective for you. But one thing that I think that the sustainability industry has always maybe touted as kind of oppositional with the culinary industry is the electric kitchen. So just like you talked about, the induction stove top and can you get a little bit more into your experience with that? What was your hesitation? What was your, what was your perception of it before you started working at Chatham? And then how did you come to kind of learn to use it, to to use it with your staff, you know, to make the same quality or maybe even better food in some ways? Chris (09:09):Sure. Yeah. So going into Chatham, my perception of electric cooking was what we all think of initially is those coils that take forever to get hot. That just don’t, it takes forever to cook food. It slows down everything, things burn it’s, it’s just a terrible, terrible piece of equipment. It’s God awful. I remember getting into apartments when I was a kid and being like ugh electric, and that wasn’t even cooking. It was just so bad that like I knew, and, you know, I knew a little bit about induction because of, you know, being in the industry you’d come across, like the bake shop would have a little induction, you know, hob that you would plug in and take it wherever you, wherever you want. But it was never something that like we used continuously or we use religiously. It was just a novel thing that you can just take anywhere you want instead of having butane or anything like that. And that was cool. But that, but that was the extent of my knowledge. I had no idea what it does, how fast it does. So I was like, okay, well, you know, never one to shy away from a challenge. I said, all right, well, we’re going to make this happen. We’re going to figure out what we can do. And you know, not a problem, whenever it gets installed, we’re going to get trained on it anyway. So we’re all good. So the kitchen gets built. We go into the kitchen, talking to the rep, he’s trying to show us how it works. She’s like, all right, here’s a knob, turn it on and turn off and make sure your pans are magnetic. I’m okay. Is there anything else you need to know? And he said, this he’s like, Hey man, I just sell it. I don’t know how this stuff works. Really. You know, you figure it out you’re the expert. I was like, great. And that was the notion we got from every one of our vendors on every one of the pieces of equipment. You turn it on, you use it. What else do you want? I don’t really know. Like I just sell it. So that was the first big hurdle, is how do we learn to work with it? And we learned to work with it fast because you know, I’m supposed to be leading this kitchen. And none of my staff is really classically trained or anything like that. So we’re like, okay, I need to figure it out and act like, I know what I’m doing. Kelly (11:19):Fake it till you make it. Chris (11:20):Yeah. Right. So first thing I realized is how fast the induction unit works. So our instinct is to get in the kitchen, put our pan on the burner, crank it on high, and then, you know, go do what we had to do while the pan gets hot so we can start cooking. And so that’s exactly what I did. I get in the kitchen, get a big pot going, oil, put some garlic in there, crank it on high, turn around, before I can grab my onions, I turn back around and it’s completely burnt. Like black, not even like Brown, it’s black. And I was like, Oh, wow, that really fast. And then we started doing some tests whenever we had downtime. How fast is the boil water? How fast does this work? How fast does this work? Is this okay? Is this not okay? And we started to piece together do’s and don’ts while using induction, we started kind of dispelling our own myths that we had come up with. You know, while we were imagining what this induction kitchen was going to be, because when we got in there, it was August of 2015, and the kitchen didn’t get built until, well we didn’t move until April of 2016. So we had some time to just kind of imagine what it would be, do some research. And we kinda were all apprehensive. And then after working with it for a little bit, we realized that this is definitely superior to what we were doing, but I’d stay late and, you know, practice different things and, you know, just observe what the staff were doing. And then we would kind of get together a lunchtime, talk about it. And then from there we kind of just taught each other how to, how it works. And then I would start training them on things I’ve read and things I saw. And over the time we just made it work. And then over the time we just fell in love with it, to the point where that we would go help another account and It would almost feel snobbish walking in like, “Oh, you’re still using gas?” Because we will put the pan on and crank it on high and it would take so much longer to get hot so we can start cooking what we need to cook. It was kind of like when you’re used to driving a Ferrari and then you’ve got to drive a Honda civic, like that’s how it felt. Kelly (13:44):Yeah. And that was one thing in in Karla and Rachelle’s demonstration, and she calls herself an electric kitchen super fan, which maybe you would call yourself as well. New Speaker (13:59):Oh for sure. and Rachelle is Awesome. Kelly (14:00):Yeah. It’s so good that, that, it’s such a, it’s a small community of people electric kitchen, super fans across the country. That’s very fun. Chris (14:08):Yeah. So Rachelle and I, just through talking, we realized that, like, she and I are two peas in a pod. We love this stuff to the degree. She’s an expert in residential equipment. And I’ve never been a personal chef outside of what I did for president Sheresh at Carnegie Mellon, but I prep everything in my own kitchen and bring it up and just we’d warm it up. So I know everything there is to know about commercial cooking. And if yo…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Farm-to-Shelter Building with Andrew Linn Jan 05, 2021
    Show notes

    Featuring Andrew Linn Andrew Linn founded bld.us with Jack Becker in Washington, DC in 2013. bld.us integrates traditional construction methods with new technologies and organic materials ideally suited to the Mid-Atlantic region to create an architecture of accommodation. Based in Historic Anacostia, bld.us seeks opportunities in economies–of scale, of scope, of density, of means, and of materials. Andrew has 16 years of experience in the Architecture industry, and has been a lecturer at University of Maryland’s School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation since 2017. Read more We’ve all heard of “farm-to-table” in the context of our food, but what about “farm-to-shelter” in the context of our homes? As we try to become more conscious about the food we eat and the clothes we wear, we must also consider the materials we use when constructing our homes. While many acknowledge the need for better materials in buildings, very few modern day designers have successfully completed a project that consists of healthy and sustainable materials from top to bottom. Andrew Linn and his partner Jack Becker of bld.us are doing just that. They started by building their own sustainable (and compostable) structure – the Grass House – located in Washington, DC. This project holds a special place in our hearts, because we worked as the sustainability consultants for the house. In this episode, Robb talks with Andrew about the materials he employs in his projects, and their positive sustainability and health impacts. Episode Information & Resources Grass House Case Study bld.us website Tour the Grass House Building materials mentioned throughout episode: BamCore ThermaCork BarkHouse Havelock Wool Resawn Timber Co Robi Decking OmniBlock We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly (00:05):Welcome to buildings and beyond Robb (00:08):The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment Kelly (00:12):By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:17):I’m Rob Aldrich. Kelly (00:18):And I’m Kelly Westby. Robb (00:21):In this episode, I spoke with Andrew Linn, who is an architect based in Washington, DC. We talked about sustainable materials and products he uses quite a bit. And we talk specifically about the Grass House project, which is actually his office in Washington. As you’ll hear Andrew is really a believer in many of the products he uses, which is very cool. We often try to avoid too much discussion of specific products on this podcast, but that is not the case in this episode. A quick disclaimer, this isn’t necessarily an endorsement by Steven winter associates, these are Andrew’s opinions, but I really enjoyed talking with him and I learned quite a bit. We’ll provide some links in the show notes for folks who want to dig deeper. I also wanted to mention a couple of podcasts we had – a two-parter we had back in the summer of 2019, where we interviewed Charlie Stevenson. We talked more in depth about sustainable materials. So if that’s an interest, you might want to check those out. Here’s my conversation with Andrew. Andrew (01:29):I have always wanted to be an architect. I grew up wanting to be an architect and I worked for some of the best offices I could imagine working for when I was in school. And when I left school, I realized that even those offices were hampered by the material pallets that they were able to work with. And so my college best friend and I set out to find a healthy building material palette. So we moved to DC where we felt like there was already an appreciation for the landscape and for the materials that come from the landscape, there was also and is in DC, a an awareness of an attention to code and regulations and designing for those most in need. So we felt like DC was the place to to build our practice. So we moved to DC, founded, bld.us and began looking at the materials that were available to us, although not always the most popular, that were the healthiest for the environment and for the users of the buildings Robb (02:48):I just realized your URL, your website, the URL is great. It’s bld.us. And you, you say ‘build us,’ that’s how you say it. Andrew (03:00):Yup, like a proper Roman name, Robb (03:04):BLD is your, is the initials of your firm? Is that isn’t that right? Andrew (03:12):We began as Becker Linn design, my name is Andrew Linn and my partner is Jack Becker. So we began as Becker Linn designed, but we’ve begun just referring to ourselves as bld.us Both in website and a name because we like the ethos that it promotes. We’re about building community. We’re about building using American domestically sourced products. So bld.us is a really nice idea to strive for. Robb (03:45):I see. Very easy to remember URL. So when we were talking about doing this podcast a week or two ago, you used a term that I don’t know that I’d ever heard before, which was farm to shelter. I’ll farm to table. This is farm to shelter. Is that something that you coined that something you’ve been thinking about for awhile? Andrew (04:12):I hope I haven’t coined it, but I haven’t heard it much. So it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s the case. You know, half of the TV that I find that’s available has something to do with cooking. And even if it’s not a cooking show, they find a way to bring it in. And people are very interested in where their food is coming from, how it’s getting to them, who’s taking it out of the ground and how they’re being compensated for taking it out of the ground. That same attention and awareness has gone into the clothing that we drape around ourselves. And it only seems logical that that type of of awareness would also extend into the built environment. So there are different ways of tracking the health of a building like the living, building challenge and like the well rating systems. But they’re very challenging. We’ve tried to work within those requirements and in DC middle-class housing, it’s really not feasible without subsidy of some sort. So we’ve been looking for a farm to shelter, material palette that is affordable to the middle class that doesn’t require a whole bunch of soft costs, sunk into applying for different ratings and different certification systems. And we’re just looking to bring affordable, healthy housing to the people that need it, and who are reliant on Home Depot and Lowe’s. And nothing Home Depot and Lowe’s, they are getting with the program almost quicker than many of our clients. Robb (06:04):Yeah, it was kind of interesting for me to hear that, that term, just using local sustainable materials, the farm to shelter, we’ve all heard farm to table. It was, it was a pretty clever term. I thought. So the project that we started talking with you about, and Steven winter associates worked with you a little bit on it is is called grass house. And is it your office? Is it your primary workspace studio space? Andrew (06:43):Yes, it is. Robb (06:44):Okay. And it’s, it’s an outbuilding. Could you describe what it is, where it is? Andrew (06:51):Yeah, so the grass house is basically a compostable accessory structure built behind an 1892 queen Anne Victorian house at the foot of the Frederick Douglas House in the Anacostia historic district. So this is East of the Anacostia river. It’s the only historic district in ward seven and eight of DC. Even though there are a few others that deserve to be historic districts. But that’s where we work from. We do a lot of work there. It is a place that has a pretty diverse, eclectic set of styles within its historic district. But that’s within a time span of about the 1880s to the 1910s. So we’re working within that vernacular and trying to design and build a building that is as healthy as possible. We ended up with a LEED platinum rating on it and is as sort of affordable or at least speaks to different affordable moves so that we could use it as a showcase and bring in different potential clients and different people who were interested in it, different neighbors so that they could see possibilities. So we have a fun stair. We have a fun window detail, we have a fun bathroom countertop detail. And we usually tell our clients that they could pick one or two of those details to really play with in their house. But in addition, where we’re trying to showcase as many different, healthy building materials and natural finishes as possible. Robb (08:39):Yeah. So folks can go to BLD dot U.S. And there are pictures there, which are, which is pretty cool. The first thing I noticed when I looked at the pictures was this is a very small building. What was it like a 250 square foot footprint or something like that? Andrew (08:58):Correct. And for that reason, we went down and we dug out a basement, which in general, we’re not typically fond of, but we wanted to maximize the square footage that we were able to have, but we wanted to keep the overall massing as small as we could. Robb (09:17):So you used a term a couple of minutes ago. I think you said it’s a compostable structure, which I understand, but does that term have great optics? The first thought is, Hmm, it’s gonna rot quickly. Do you run into resistance with that, with that phrasing? Does it test well? Andrew (09:43):I mean, the people that I’m quote unquote testing it with are very into the idea because we quickly explain that the techniques that you use to build the building require you know, attention to detail and you pull the wood or compostable material up off the ground a little bit, and you protect it with big overhanging eaves and use a nice breathable rain screen system so that the whole building can breath. When you approach a building trying to find the places where it will fail which are almost always related to water or moisture in some way, when you approach the design with that as your priority, the fact that the materials that you produce it with are compostable, it isn’t an issue. So at the grass house, we have slate and copper roof, you know, you’re not going to find a more durable roof than ours. We have big overhanging eaves. We have a breathable exterior cladding system. We have a concrete base that comes up two and sometimes three feet up, up off the ground, so that all of our bamboo and wood framing system is away from rain. And we collect all the water that you know, falls off of our roof and we harvest it in a cistern. So when you have control over the water, or at least when you have respect for the water that is trying to degrade your building, you’re able to make the building out of healthier materials. Robb (11:23):So you mentioned bamboo, and that’s where the name grass house comes from. I believe, maybe I assumed that, but I believe that’s where that came from. Can you talk about the wall system a little bit? Andrew (11:37):Yes. I’d love to. I love BamCore. I’m one of their biggest fans. BamCore is essentially the mass grass to mass timber. So it is a lighter weight version of the same principles that are being applied in mass timber. And as many of us have come to realize, mass timber doesn’t have great implications for the single family and low rise residential markets, but BamCore does. And that’s exactly where BamCore is at its best. So Bamcore has been refining this panel system, and what the panels allow us to do is build without studs. And that gives us continuous insulation cavities, which gives us incredibly high performing wall systems that allow us to contain either the hot or the cold air that we’re creating. So we’re able to input very little energy into heating or cooling a BamCore house. You’re able to reach passive standards almost effortlessly because you’re removing all of the standard thermal bridges which is what exterior insulation envelopes attempt to do, And do, but bamcore does it in a, in a more integral more high performing way. Robb (12:59):I don’t have any firsthand experience with this product, but it’s a panelized approach. So like all the walls come on a truck or a pallet, or a couple of pallets, all cut in the right dimensions and labeled, and you piece it together on site pretty quickly, I imagine? Andrew (13:22):Very quickly and a real benefit of bamcore over other systems like sip systems or pre-manufactured systems is that these are panels that you and I could lift. And I don’t know what you look like, and I know that you could and I could lift them because it’s essentially a piece of drywall. So you’re able to remove drywall, you’re able to remove studs, you’re able to remove OSB sheathing, and you have these packets of precut wall panel delivered to the site. You pop them up off the truck and up onto the site almost like an Ikea structure. They used to have you screw them in, and now you’re just nailing them in. So very simple and very simple to take apart, you know, someday in the future. These panels are unbelievably durable. They they’re made from bamboo, which is in some cases as strong as, you know, different types of metal, stronger than different types of metal. And that allows for the panels to have sheer strength to them. They’re Bulletproof. They perform extremely well in hurricanes. The makeup of these walls and these wall sections allows you to have thinner or larger wall cavities. So these, these walls are just as high performing and cost-saving as they in Florida as they are in Vermont. Robb (14:55):We can put some links in the show notes, because, I mean, I talked to you, you described the system a little bit, but I didn’t get a full picture until I looked at some pictures and as the podcast is only audio, we can certainly link to it, because it was pretty cool. I didn’t get a full picture of how all the pieces went together until I went to the website. And it seems like a lot less material. Cause my understanding is they are trying to grow bamboo domestically, but they are not yet. So a lot of this, a lot of the material gets shipped a long way, but there’s much, much less material. It looks like. Is that a big piece that goes into it being a carbon winner? Andrew (15:36):It’s a huge piece. There’s less material, there’s less material waste, and bamboo is the best carbon sequestering organic material that exists. So the more bamboo we can use, the better. Bamboo, unlike wood retains the carbon that it sequesters even while it’s being harvested, because it gets clipped like grass, not mowed, not clear cut, but clipped. And so a clean bamboo Grove is healthier and taking out calms that are ready to be harvested, makes very clean bamboo Grove. So the more bamboo we can use, the more bamboo we can plant and store in the built environment the, the more carbon we’re going to be able to sequester. So even though right now bamcore is bringing bamboo in from places like central America and South America, which are still relatively close given that we get doug fir from Washington state or Oregon. They’re working on creating a domestic supply of bamboo, but there’s already so much bamboo around the world that we just need to find more ways to use it in the built environment Robb (16:57):And insulation. You can use any insulation with this panel system, but you went with wool, which again, I don’t have any firsthand experience with. Not mineral wool, but like sheep’s wool, is that, is this the first time you’d used it? Or is this one of your kind of go-to materials? Andrew (17:14…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Designing for Inclusion with Victoria Lanteigne Dec 02, 2020
    Show notes

    Featuring Victoria Lanteigne, MPP, WELL AP Victoria Lanteigne is a Universal Design subject matter expert with over 15 years of experience leading inclusive design initiatives. She is passionate about elevating the connection between Universal Design and high-performance building initiatives, including sustainability and health, and has spoken on this topic at Greenbuild, the AIA National Convention, and Design DC, among others. Victoria is a WELL AP and WELL Faculty member and has served as a WELL Community Concept Advisor since 2017. She has a BA from Michigan State University, a Master of Public Policy from the George Washington University, and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Design from North Carolina State University. Disability inclusion in the built environment is extremely important. But, it shouldn’t end there. How do we ensure that we are being truly inclusive of all types of people, taking into account a wider diversity of backgrounds, orientations, and abilities? The answer is Universal Design. On this episode of Building’s + Beyond, Robb chats with former SWA employee and Universal Design expert, Victoria Lanteigne. Victoria has devoted her career to the advancement of Universal Design, educating herself and others on the concept and its limitless applications. In her interview, she discusses trends, tactics, and examples from the field, and challenges practitioners to re-think their definition of the word, design. Episode Information & Resources Articles written by Victoria on Universal and Inclusive Design: The Post-Pandemic Workplace Could Be the Most Inclusive Workplace We’ve Ever Designed – FOX Architects Universal Design: A tool for creating equitable spaces after COVID-19 | Articles | WELL International WELL Building Institute Previous Podcast Episodes on Universal Design: Universal Design with Mary Jo Peterson Universal Design and Accessibility in Mexico City with Luis Quintana Additional: Universal Design Principles Published in New WELL Building Standard (WELL v2) Eight Goals of Universal Design Human Rights Watch – SWA Project including Universal Design consulting services We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly (00:05):Welcome to buildings and beyond. Robb (00:08):The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment Kelly (00:12):By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:17):I’m Robb Aldrich, Kelly (00:18):And I’m Kelly Westby. Robb (00:21):In this episode, I spoke with Victoria Lanteigne, and we talked about universal design, really how universal design might improve equity and inclusion in the built environment. Here’s Victoria saying a little bit about her background. Victoria (00:39):So I have been working in the field of accessibility and universal design for quite some time. I’d say about 15 years, and I come to this field with a little bit of a different background or perspective. I actually have a background in public policy and I started off my career working in disability policy with a civil rights organization, specifically working to lead a consortium of multifamily housing developers to provide guidance on federal accessibility regulations, as well as state and local accessibility codes. And I learned very quickly that the federal laws that we have in place are really addressing accessibility from a pretty minimal standpoint. So almost looking at inclusion and accessibility from a bare minimum. So I became really interested in universal design as a tool and a methodology to go above and beyond what was required by our federal laws and codes. Robb (01:43):We talked about the roots of universal design being in accessibility or disability inclusion, but many people, and certainly Victoria among them, have lofty goals for universal design. Victoria just started a PhD program at North Carolina state university. And her goal there is to research how universal design can improve equity and inclusion beyond just disability inclusion. Universal design can be a big topic and we started discussing some basic definitions, but we quickly got into how those definitions are evolving. Victoria (02:23):There’s a lot of schools of thought around universal design. For me, I, I do of course acknowledge the origin and the roots universal design has with disability inclusion. You know, initially it was defined as a an effort to create products and spaces to be usable by the greatest number of people possible regardless of age ability or individual status. So even in its origin, universal design was really focused on comprehensive inclusion, but when we looked at universal design and practice, it was often centered on disability inclusion. And I think that’s really important. And I always like to take a minute to acknowledge how important disability inclusion is and why it’s so important. You know, when we look at the number of people living with disabilities worldwide, the number is 15%, here in the U S we have 61 million Americans living with disabilities. And if we hone in on that number, one in four adults today is living with some form of disability. So yeah, the numbers are really quite staggering and the numbers are only increasing. And I think it’s really looking at the fact that we have a broad definition of disability. So the Americans with disabilities act defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activity. When you have such a broad definition, we are of course talking about mobility and sensory disabilities, but we’re also expanding this to look at intellectual disabilities, cognitive disabilities, mental and emotional health. So things like anxiety, depression are all considered to be disabilities under the law. And as this definition of disability broadens, there are more people identifying as living with a disability. And some of that stigma is going away, which it should be, and that’s important, but universal design, you know, as you were saying, is very different from accessible design in the sense that it allowed this space to address disability from a more comprehensive approach, as opposed to focusing on the bare minimum structural compliance piece of accommodating wheelchair users, which is largely what our laws are centered around. Robb (05:03):Yeah. And I think that’s a lot of what people think. That’s what I used to think. You know, accessibility means, you know, ramps and turning radiuses and, you know, things like that. I read the links that you sent me, some articles which we’ll link to in the show notes. And I went through and just kind of tried to pick out all the different types of ability inclusion. First of all, it’s not just physical, and it’s many types of physical, but like you were saying emotional sensory, which I guess sensory is a subset of physical, but vision and auditory and mental and neuro-diversity. And I think you mentioned nerve diversity refers to people on the autism spectrum primarily. And so this is so much more than just people and wheelchair access. It’s, it’s so much more, which I think is lost on quite a few people. Victoria (06:04):I agree. And I think this is really the, the heart of how accessible design differs from universal design. And for those of us that are either practitioners or we look at these two concepts from a policy lens, whatever brings you to focus on these different design strategies, we understand kind of the nuance difference, but it’s hard for those that may not be working in close to this on a daily basis. But to me, accessible design is really talking about compliance. It’s that piece around our federal laws, building codes. It’s very prescriptive in nature. You know, we’re talking about an inch here, a quarter inch there, a bevel, you know, things that are not a lot of room for tolerance. There’s a very low design opportunity. So, you know, you either follow it and you comply or you don’t. And again, that accessible piece is largely based on accommodating mobility disabilities. So I often like to think about accessible design is what we must have. It’s the baseline bare minimum. And on the other side, we have universal design, which is not regulated. And because of that, the guidance can be very limited and or conflicting. We’ve got a lot of decentralized places where universal design guidance comes from, but on the flip side, universal design is not prescriptive. So there’s a huge opportunity for how to implement universal design. What universal design can look like in practice, and this is really where the opportunity to become inclusive of, of disability, but then inclusive beyond disability as well. So I like to look at universal design is what we could have as opposed to what we must have. It’s a design goal, it’s a strategy. And it, it takes a lot of collaboration and innovation to really get it, get it right to where it could be. I’m looking at universal design as a tool to explore how we can bring more equity into design and by doing so, how we can advance equity through the design of the built environment. And, you know, when we think about the origin of universal design being rooted in disability inclusion, we also can look to more contemporary definitions of universal design. One that I particularly subscribe to is a process enables and empowers a diverse population by improving human performance, health, and wellness and social participation. So this is a definition that comes from the idea center out of the university of Buffalo. And when we think about these goals around universal design, that center on performance, health, social participation, these goals mirror a lot of the goals that building performance initiatives have around sustainability around healthy buildings. So this really begins to position universal design in a way that can begin to address aspects of civil rights issues across the board, further kind of digging deeper into this definition. The university of Buffalo Idea center came out with eight goals around universal design. And around these goals, we have a lot of opportunity to begin to build out design strategies that start to address equity. And as a couple of examples, you know, some of the goals are, are talking about things that maybe already are part of universal design, so comfort and body fit things like ergonomics, right? Size and space shapes, clear floor space, but can we take it beyond that to start thinking about visual ergonomics, audio ergonomics, physical ergonomics. So really thinking about that next step understanding and awareness are two additional goals. So here wayfinding and spaces become critical perceptible information as well. So having information that is understandable from multiple aspects. So again, thinking about the fact that we might come to a problem from different experiences and with different ways of solving that problem. And as an example, in our prep call, we were talking about Ikea directions, right? Love them or hate them, they’re kind of like this example of, of universal design in a way, because the man with the hammer is going to be the man with the hammer, no matter what country you’re in. Right. and so that ability to kind of pick up and look at those directions and find them to be user intuitive is, is an example of that. But then let’s think about how we can build on that even more. So can we have the same definitions be available on an audio recording so that somebody that has vision can listen to that on an audio tape? Can we have the manual that also has tasks broken out based on children’s involvement and parents involvement to get, you know, the whole family involved? Can we think about ways that make this experience even more inclusive depending on who’s approaching the problem and the different ways that you have to solve a problem? Robb (12:20):I recently helped some some friends colleagues who were moving into a new home, I helped them move in and they asked me to assemble some of their kitchen cabinets. And I haven’t felt so incompetent in a long time. I was stymied by putting together all these cabinets by all the instructions. There’s no text anywhere in the instructions and I appreciate that’s to be language neutral. But I couldn’t, I couldn’t do it. One fitting had three holes and I didn’t realize it had three holes and I used two of the holes, but I was supposed to use a different one of the hole. And it wasn’t clear to me from looking at the pictures, it was an attempt to be certainly more inclusive, but I found it infuriating. Robb (13:20):And I guess it’s a question in my mind. I mean, we’re, we’re talking about being inclusive of all these different people with disabilities and also beyond disabilities, you know age and gender and religion and language, do you have to start sacrificing? Can you please everybody, well, maybe not necessarily, but is there, is there a give and take, do you see kind of sacrifices with, you know, certain elements, and is it kind of a balancing act for designers or consultants or people implementing these strategies? Victoria (14:00):I look at universal design as a design strategy. So it’s not a template it’s never going to be the same across every project. I think what we need to move more towards is a collaborative approach to creating spaces that reflect the context and environment that that project is based in. I think it’s about really thinking about the users who’s using the space, what’s the function of the space and how can we kind of go through and accommodate as strategically as we can, the different ways that people will be impacted by an experiencing this space. So I think it’s different with every project. And I think this is where the challenge with universal design can come. It’s not about more, is always better. It’s really about choosing your strategy around inclusion, Robb (15:16):And it’s not, it’s not prescriptive, like you said. It’s not kind of checking boxes. It’s really trying to be mindful and maybe artful in being as inclusive as possible. Victoria (15:27):That’s exactly right. And so thinking about creating a community center in maybe an underserved area, that approach to inclusion is going to be very different than embedding universal design in an international airport. Right. So I think that, and I think that’s okay. And I think that’s how it should be. I think that when we have guiding principles that are built out in a way that provokes thought and innovation from designers and their collaborators, that’s what we really want. That’s the space that we want to get to with universal design. So not, you must implement this in every situation. It’s, Hey, have you thought about how you’re going to account for cultural diversity in this project? Here are some options. This is what’s worked, figure out together how that can best be reflected in your project. Robb (16:36):So is that kind of, part of the research that you’re planning, is to evaluate strategies or approaches how well they work in different situations? Victoria (16:52):A little bit. Yeah. I mean, I say this I’m kind of laughing because I’m what seven weeks into my first semester. So it’ll be really interesting to revisit this three years from now and see how aligned I am with where I say I’m going to be. But, you know, going back to the gaps that exist around universal design, there are a lot of th…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Solar Panels or Asthma? Equity and the Built Environment with Jeremy Hays Nov 06, 2020
    Show notes

    Featuring Jeremy Hays Jeremy is a Principal at Upright Consulting Services, Strategic Partner at Kapwa Consulting, and the former Executive Director of Green For All, a national nonprofit he helped found in 2008. His consulting practice draws on years of experience working with diverse stakeholders to design and implement equitable models of economic and workforce development in the environmental sector. In his nonprofit career, Jeremy worked with scores of cities and communities across the country to pioneer inclusive approaches to creating shared prosperity and healthy communities. Jeremy is passionate about translating commitments to racial equity and sustainability into measurable outcomes and increased capacity for change agents in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors. Social equity is key to the work that we do in the built environment. Far too often, marginalized communities receive more of the burdens and less of the benefits of 21st century living – especially when it comes to housing. As an industry, it is our responsibility to address these disparities and come up with solutions that are inclusive of all people. But first, we wanted to grow our own understanding of the issues and hear what others are doing to prioritize social equity in the built environment. Our guest for this month’s episode of Buildings + Beyond is Jeremy Hays. Jeremy has a wealth of knowledge, experience, and perspective that stems from a combination of social and environmental justice. We learn about how cities are incorporating equity into their sustainability plans, why diversity of perspectives can create better solutions, and how actively thinking about equity can help the transition to a green economy. Episode Information & Resources Uplift CA Portland Clean Energy Fund Denver’s Climate Action Stakeholder Process USDN Equity Foundations Training Race Forward Equity Trainings Dr. Robert Bullard – “Father of Environmental Justice” LA Times article mentioned by Kelly – “California’s clean energy programs are mainly benefiting the rich, study finds“ We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly (00:00:05):Welcome to buildings and beyond. Robb (00:00:08):The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment. Kelly (00:00:12):By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:00:17):I’m Rob Aldrich, Kelly (00:00:18):And I’m Kelly Westby. Do you get solar panels or do you get asthma? My guest, Jeremy Hayes uses this question to highlight how communities with more people of color and more people with lower income receive more of the burdens and less of the benefits. Jeremy discusses, how the approach we take to climate change policy needs to include equity at its core, or we will inadvertently perpetuate the systems of inequity that are in place today. And when we work together, we can create bolder policy that addresses these issues holistically. Jeremy is the Principal at upright consulting services. His consulting practice draws on years of experience working with diverse stakeholders to design and implement equitable models of economic and workforce development in the environmental sector. We had a great conversation, so I’m just going to dive right in. So thank you, Jeremy, for being on the podcast with us today. Jeremy (00:01:17):Happy to be here. Thanks for having me. Kelly (00:01:20):And we’d love for the audience to get a little bit more about your background in getting into getting into this space. So how did you get into this line of work, kind of your equity consulting work that you do now? Jeremy (00:01:34):Well, you know, I’ve been working at the intersection of equity, sustainability and economic development for most of my career and I kind of fell into it if I’m totally honest, I started off you know, being quite concerned about equity issues. I grew up poor and lived in both public housing and subsidized affordable housing. And as I got to be older teenager, I was kind of angry about that and, you know, looking for ways to you know, make some change in the world. I didn’t use those terms, but I found community organizing and that was really healthy outlet for, you know, thinking about how to change some of the things that I had been frustrated with growing up. And so I really started off as an organizer thinking broadly about how to bring about positive change for low-income communities and communities of color. I’m white, but I grew up in low-income neighborhoods that were predominantly people of color. And then, you know, I, as I was sort of rounding out high school and getting into organizing and going into college, I just kind of fell into the environmental movement. It was certainly aligned with the values that I grew up with in my family, but it came about because the organizations that I was involved in had people that were, that were really concerned about the environment and that’s what they wanted to work on. And so I have always kind of been working in the environmental movement and trying to connect it to broader issues of racial and economic justice. Kelly (00:02:54):That’s great. And what is the difference between sort of environmental justice movement and the kind of equity and the environment kind of space that you’re in now? Jeremy (00:03:09):Well, ultimately, I’m not sure there’s huge difference or that there should be. I think the movements towards these concepts came from different places and kind of caught on, and people are using slightly different language in different places, but there are a lot of similarities, you know, the environmental justice movement was really born out of historically marginalized and disproportionately impacted communities, mostly communities of color that were saying, you know, why do we get all the burdens and none of the benefits of 21st century living, you know, all the toxic waste and the bad air et cetera. And we’re really fighting to correct the conditions that brought about, you know, increased rates of asthma poor living conditions, et cetera, in, in communities of color, where they were bearing the brunt of these environmental hazards. I think in cities, and I work mostly with local government and city government, and cities started talking about sustainability before they started talking about environmental justice. So cities were beginning to work with this concept of, we want to do something for the environment, we want to be sustainable. We want to be thinking about a clean future. We want to do something about climate change. And in some cities they’ve connected that in a traditional sense of sustainable development to concerns about economic development and social equity, but it really took the environmental justice movement pushing hard on cities and the federal government and others to be recognized and to start to weave concerns about environmental justice into, into policy. And, and I think one of the things that is interesting about the moment that we’re in now is that cities and the people that work with cities are starting to really come around and adopt at least principles of environmental justice and trying to center some of those concerns in the way that they think about sustainability and policy-making. Probably still not enough as we would ultimately like. But there has been a lot of movement at least over the past 20 years that I’ve been kind of watching this stuff. Kelly (00:05:06):Yeah. And taking a step maybe a little bit back, actually. How do you define equity? Jeremy (00:05:13):Well, that’s a great question. And you know, one of the things that that we do is that is work hard with people that we’re working with to come up with their, you know, particular definitions of equity that work for them and their organization. So one of the things we say is that, you know, there’s not a cookie cutter approach here. This is a complicated issue and people really need to get into it and sort of coming up with an understanding of what equity is and what it means to your organization, to your city, and understanding what the inequities are and what the historical systems are that brought those about. That’s all part of the process of doing equity work. So while there’s no single definition that’s in use everywhere, there are some definitions that and some elements of definitions that are becoming increasingly common in, in cities and in some of the organizations that work with. And actually the one that I that I use the most often comes from a colleague of mine often consulting partner, Desiree Williams Raji, who is the founder and principal at a group called Kapwa consulting. She was an equity strategies manager for the city of Portland, Oregon for a long time, and has worked through the urban sustainability directors network to help other cities really think about how to center equity in their sustainability work. And she has this great definition that she borrowed or kind of adapted from the environmental justice movement and other work that was happening in the field and is built on that. And the way that she describes it is this, there are three kinds of dimensions of equity that we need to be aware of when we’re thinking about this work. One is procedural equity, which is a fair and equitable process. So this is about voice and participation in decision-making. You know, what we hear from communities and organizations that are advocating is, you know, “nothing about us without us,” this idea that if communities aren’t at the table making decisions, they’re likely on the menu. So that’s procedural equity and it’s about having that voice and inclusion in the process, especially and most importantly from communities that have been historically excluded from the decision-making processes and that bear a disproportionate negative impacts that received sort of more, that burdens less of the benefits of some of those policies. So that’s a procedural equity frame. Yeah. A lot of good work around that. And that’s why we talk about community engagement and community outreach and partnership as being part of that. Another dimension, the second of three, that Desiree uses in her work with cities is to say, there’s also this concept of distributional equity, and we need to be thinking about what do you get at the end of the day, right? The burdens and benefits and how those are distributed. Distributional equity is about impacts and about outcomes. So questions around distributional equity, are The policy goes into place. What do you get? You get asthma, or do you get some solar panels? You know, do you get a bill reduction you know, or do you get a longer commute to work, right? Like, how are the benefits, the resources with any given decision sort of distributed equitably and important within that concept is understanding what the current conditions of inequity are. Because equity is not fairness. I think most people have seen this popular image, right, where that often there are people trying to look over a tall fence and, you know, everybody gets the same size box and that doesn’t work. And so you have to actually kind of distribute resources with attention to where there are deficits and disparity. Jeremy (00:08:27):The third concept with equity that we’d like to use is recognizing that you can have a great process. You can have people come together and do a great process, include lots of voices. And then you can actually design a policy and implement it in a way that really is attentive to distributing benefits of that policy to people who need them most and addressing historical wrongs. But if you don’t change the actual structures, the systems, the institutions, and the way that they function over time, you’re always going to be playing catch up. And so the third dimension is structural equity or what Desiree calls intergenerational equity, because this is about changing the decision-making and accountability structures within institutions, so that they’re defending and extending equity gains over time. Sometimes I say, if we do structural equity, right, we could wash out all the good people from an institution, like all the folks who did all the training and learned and did all the hard work and made all the policies. We could take them out and replace them with brand new people. And the decision making and accountability structures in that organization would still help us take care of people that have been wronged in the past, and that are suffering today. So those are some of the other concepts that we work with, but that, that simple breakdown has been so helpful for cities and for other organizations that are working on equity issues, in large part because it is a complex issue and the word gets thrown around a lot. And one of the things that we noticed is we can go into a room with, you know, a dozen different people back in the days when we used to get to go into a room with a dozen different people. And we can all be talking about equity and saying the word equity, but we might all be meaning slightly different things. And so really getting into it and starting to break it down and take it apart and be really clear about what we mean is really important. Kelly (00:10:09):Right, absolutely. And you actually had talked about a couple of different definitions of equity and one that really resonated with me was about outcomes. I don’t remember exactly what it was. I don’t know if you remember off the top of your head. Jeremy (00:10:24):Yeah. In your outcomes. No, that’s exactly right. Yeah, one of the, one of the things that we say is when we do equity right, I mean, equity means that your identity no longer determines your outcomes, right? Like if we live in a world that’s racially equitable, right. We won’t see disparities between these different racial groups. I mean, the fact that, you know, African-American women are three times more likely to die in childbirth than white women. You know, you can dive into the research there, but ultimately what it comes down to is the reason for that is because they’re black and they live in a society that in which the game is sort of tilted against black women. And so that shows up in the data as much more likely to die in childbirth. And we see these disparities over and over again, when income on incarceration rates on health outcomes, et cetera. Jeremy (00:11:14):And that’s what we’re working with. We’re really trying to understand, well, what are the systems that produce those disparate outcomes and how do we begin to change them? And that concept of systems is another important piece of equity definitions. There’s a lot of really important work that needs to happen everywhere in America to address people’s understanding and sensitivity to different cultures and people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds. There’s a lot of work that needs to be done to unpack and take apart individual bias, implicit bias, and we could do all that work and we could still be perpetuating inequities because of the way that different systems have sort of worked over time to create disadvantage and disparity for people of color and women and LGBTQ and disabled people and others. And so what we’re really trying to figure out is like, what are those systems? And one of the concepts, again thatmy colleague Desiree uses is let’s talk about broken systems, not about broken people, r…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    ‘Back to the Basics’ of Affordable Housing with Les Bluestone Oct 06, 2020
    Show notes

    Featuring Les Bluestone, Co-Founder, Blue Sea Development Les Bluestone has been developing, building, and managing affordable housing for 40 years. His firm, Blue Sea Development, developed and built NYC’s first affordable Energy Star certified home, it’s first three affordable LEED Platinum multifamily buildings, and the country’s first building certified under the Partnership for a Healthier America’s Active Design Verified program. As former Board Chair of Habitat for Humanity NYC, Les was appointed to and presently serves on the NYC Workforce Development Board, is a founding board member of the Center for Active Design, and a member of NYSERDA’s Green Jobs/Green NY Advisory Board. His passion and focus is on improving people’s lives through housing and on making sustainable, healthy lives possible for people who need it most, but can afford it least. In a city as crowded and expensive as New York City, there is a growing need for access to safe and affordable housing. With this demand comes great innovation, as well as roadblocks and challenges between construction, financing, and policy. In this month’s Buildings + Beyond episode, Robb sits down with Les Bluestone, co-founder of Blue Sea Development. Les has been leading the way in affordable, green building in New York City since the 80’s. He gives us a brief history lesson on affordable housing in NYC, and provides us with his outlook of what development and construction will look like in 5 years and beyond. Episode Information & Resources Arbor House Case Study – SWA + Blue Sea Development project discussed in the episode We Want to Hear From You! Send your feedback and questions to podcast@swinter.com About Buildings and Beyond Buildings and Beyond is the podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment by focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Buildings and Beyond is a production of Steven Winter Associates. We provide energy, green building, and accessibility consulting services to improve the built environment. For more information, visit swinter.com. Hosts: Robb Aldrich | Kelly Westby Production Team: Heather Breslin | Alex Mirabile | Dylan Martello | Jayd Alvarez Episode Transcript Kelly (00:05):Welcome to buildings and beyond. Robb (00:08):The podcast that explores how we can create a more sustainable built environment. Kelly (00:12):By focusing on efficiency, accessibility, and health. Robb (00:17):I’m Robb Aldrich. Kelly (00:18):And I’m Kelly Westby. Robb (00:22):In this episode, I spoke with Les Bluestone with Blue Sea Development. Les has been a developer in and around New York city for about 40 years focused on housing and really mostly affordable housing. I’ve worked with Les on a few projects going back like 20 years. But before this interview, I hadn’t talked with him much about the history of affordable housing going way back, his history and really how affordable housing has changed over the decades. It really was quite interesting. A lot has changed in the past 40 years, as you might imagine – much for the better, but not everything according to Les, which we’ll get into. So we talk a little bit about the history of affordable housing. Also challenges unique to affordable housing as compared to market rate construction and where he thinks we should be headed in the future. Here’s my conversation with Les Bluestone. Les (01:26):When I started out in this business, I was in a family business and we were doing market rate and then in the early eighties, things were slowing down or looked like things were going to slow down. And the city was just forming this entity called the New York city housing partnership. And they were trying to find market rate developers to do affordable housing. The theory being is that the city had just come out of its near bankruptcy state in the late mid seventies. So the city had this huge quantity of in REM properties that they had taken back during that period. And so they had all the land, the developers had all the know-how and someone, Kathy Wilde, was the woman who started the housing partnership, had the idea that, you know, if you could partner the city and private developers together that you would get production, like hadn’t been before. Up until that point, you know, anything that was developed as affordable housing for the most part was done by the federal government. Robb (02:41):Ah, okay. Interesting. And was New York kind of a leader in that regard or were other, were other places doing it? Les (02:47):No. New York was definitely the leader. Yeah. we gave lots of tours and lots of seminars to people from all over the country that you came to to what it was all about and how it worked. So, yeah, it was, it was a, it was a great program. It really was a huge success success. And it got modified over time, you know, it became so successful that the city decided that that it shouldn’t be run by a not-for-profit, it should be run by them and they kind of took over the program. The concept. Robb (03:27):So I guess then, or now what are the big differences between market rate and affordable development? Les (03:36):Well, back then the differences were pretty huge. As I said, most all affordable housing or anything that was subsidized was built by the federal government and in New York city, you can, you can spot those buildings a mile away. They were all built during this more or less the same period. And you know, eight by eight brick was a common material that they use. They had a formula about the mechanicals and they had a formula about the exterior and the windows. And so when you walk into these buildings, they look very similar, even though they may have been, you know, designed by different architects, they had they had specs that they had to go by. Whereas the market rate, it was pretty much whatever was going on at the time for better or for worse. You know, when, when there was a, a lot of competition the bar got raised and, and, and in terms of the quality of the units you know, amenities and finishes, that sort of thing that really kind of went up and down with the market. Robb (04:50):Okay. And now, have you shifted really pretty exclusively to affordable now? Or you still do a mix? Les (05:01):No, we haven’t done anything conventional in many, many years. Everything for decades we’ve done is affordable. Robb (05:13):Okay. Yeah. So I mean that this program in the right around 1980, I guess, was the start and never looked back? Les (05:23):No, I do look back, you know, government can be kind of a bear to deal with at times. And, you know, the thought of buying a piece of land building, what you want to build, how you want to build it without having everybody in the world, you know, involved in it is kind of a nice thought, you know, a little public housing Kalanick, so to speak. So it would be, it would be nice to get back to that, I think in time to time. But, I have to say that, you know, nothing special, but I do see the need for people to have their first homes and to have safe homes and affordable homes. So that’s kind of, that’s kind of in my fabric. Robb (06:13):Gotcha. Did you do a mix of ownership and rental? Les (06:17):Yeah. We do both. Robb (06:19):Okay. Cool. And I mean, obviously, you know, codes and standards have evolved for conventional buildings a lot, but what are the extra hoops you need to jump through when you’re doing affordable? Or I guess it depends where the funding’s coming from. Les (06:37):Right, exactly. Yeah. Well, I have to say though, the housing partnership, when it initially started, it was really just about getting the units out there. As many units as we could, because there were such a crisis. There still is, but there was back then too, and not a whole lot of attention was paid to mechanical systems in energy efficiency. But those were the eighties that was not really high on everyone’s radar, but, back then the, the, the world was a very different place. There was a huge boom going on in real estate where everybody with a shovel was a developer. And so the quality was all over the place. There were lots of people that got into it that shouldn’t have gotten into it for lots of reasons. And there were people that were in it that are still in it now and doing the right thing. But the city the city’s involvement and by virtue of the fact that the projects were city owned land, they came with city or, and, or state subsidy. So they had the money and they were issued by RFP. So, so for a developer to, to get the project, you know, we had to put together something that was gonna, you know, make our project look better than maybe the 10 or 20 other projects that were submitted for that particular site. So there were lots of ways to do it but what it created was a competition amongst the developers and, and it ended up raising the bar slowly. It raised it on market forces. And then after a while the city started putting in its own requirements into, into the RFP. So they raised the bar, you know statutorily. Robb (08:41):Okay. and that’s still the case? Les (08:45):Yeah. Yeah. That’s that’s still the case very much the case. In fact, maybe a little too much the case now. You know, building housing is, you know, it’s, it’s a process, it’s basically a math equation. It’s a math problem. Here’s your land cost, here are your construction costs here are your operational costs, and you have to put all those numbers together and come out to a place where it works. When those numbers start to get skewed, either by market forces, you know, such shortages of material or huge increases or lack of labor, you know, then what happens is in order to build that same unit, that city has to come up with more money, or you have to reduce the costs some other way. So you’re constantly moving these equations. But, there’s been a big push now to sustainability and energy efficiency in the eyes of the city. And rightly so. However, you know, the rub is that, is it better to have a hundred units at the absolute premium standard in efficiency and sustainability, or to have 200 units that’s maybe at, you know, 60 or 70 or 80% of that gold standard. Robb (10:16):So I’ve heard that before, like, you know, do we need to build affordable housing? Does it need to be the best? Does it need to be passive house? Does it need to be LEED platinum? The margins I have heard, like are more in the 5% range. Like, do we need, do we need to spend 5% more to make super premium quality affordable housing? Or we can, we make 5% more housing units that is really good affordable housing? But I mean, do you have a sense? Les (10:49):the 5% is a moving number. 5% in good times, you know, when all of a sudden there are tariffs on everything that comes into this country and labor is not available, and you’re dealing with COVID that 5% is not 5% anymore. It’s now 10% or 15% or 20%. You know, there was a period, you know, I can remember it when all of the plywood that was being met, this is going back some decades, but, but I can remember that all the plywood that was being manufactured in the United States was going to China because China was in such a growth spurt, and they had so much demand that the manufacturers could get, you know, so much more money for it in China than the U S that it was almost impossible to get a piece of plywood and the prices were absolutely crazy. So those things still happen. Those kinds of commodity, you know, right now we huge lumber tariffs, the the government just imposed aluminum tariffs on Canada as well coming from Canada. So, you know, that number, the 5% is constantly moving. But the, the requirements of, you know, the people that are running these housing programs, don’t always account for that. And, you know, we want what we want and we want it now. And, you know, don’t really always understand, you know, the effects, Robb (12:27):But, but is that a new issue or it may be exaggerated now? Les (12:36):well, I think their appetite is increased. I think you know, the government always had, you know, it’s requirements, they’re putting in the land, they’re putting in the money and rightfully, you know, they should get what they want out of it. But I think with the dawning or the wakening of people’s sustainability consciousness, the government has like jumped on that bandwagon and is now kind of gone over the top in some ways, at some points in time. And this changes by the way, from administration to administration, you know, the other thing to throw into that mix is that every four to eight years, you know, you take the deck of cards and you throw it up in the air and start all over again, because there’s a new set of elected officials. each with a different agenda and each with different priorities. So there’s not as much flexibility in my mind in government to account for what’s going on in the world. It’s we want what we want. And and sometimes they can get it because they can find the financing, the subsidies, but I mean, like I said, you know, we have to guarantee rents If we’re renting an apartment, we can’t raise it a penny to account for any increasing costs, regardless of what they are. So if the costs go up from, you know, over a period of time, then the government has to usually make up the difference because there’s no simple other way to do it. Robb (14:28):Interesting. Okay. So I think a lot of the regulators, a lot of the agencies, a lot of the funding organizations are starting to Institute some programmatic requirements. And, and you’ve done a lot. I think it was just about 20 years ago. It was just about 20 years ago. And I started working for Steven winter associates. One of the first projects I worked on was one of yours, one of the Melrose projects in the Bronx. And I think it was one of the first energy star affordable projects in the state? Les (15:06):It was the first in the state. Robb (15:09):Okay. Yeah. And, and you’ve done many more since. You’ve done certainly LEED buildings and enterprise green communities, passive house? I think you said you were working on PH? Les (15:24):We’re working on a Passive house building now. Yes. Robb (15:25):Okay. So you’re not a stranger to many of these programs. What are a couple of the real innovations program-wise that resulted in better buildings? And then also what are the couple big stumbling blocks or, or annoyances that are just really hard to meet or require a lot of money or require a lot of effort or coordination? Les (15:52):I think getting back to basics is probably been in my mind the best way, you know, to, to improve the quality and improve the efficiency. The technology, as with all technology is, you know, gets issued and gets put out there, you know, maybe 10 years before we really understand how to use it. Or we understand what its good points and bad points are. I mean, I can’t tell you how many times we’ve used new products that are, you know, everybody said we’re the best and this and that. And so much better than that. And so many less problems. And` then five years later, Oh, well yeah, those systems are all, we don’t use that anymore because it had all these problems. And so there we are with, you know, buildings that were built that way. So, so that, I mean, but that, you know, that kind of progression is not uncommon, but, but it was happening and it still is happening so fast and furious that no one’s really, you know, there’s no time to think or to get real track records. Everyone just throws these concepts and products to market and expects everyone to adopt them. And and the government buys into a lot of, you know, hook, line and sinker without really, you know, getting, getting tested and proven, not a lot of data sometimes. Robb (17:17):Is there an example that you can cite without the besmirching, some samples? Les (17:23):I mean roofing systems, boiler controls, I mean, you name it. so I’ll give you one basic thi…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 Next

    Related Podcasts

    Invisibilia

    1

    Invisibilia Personal Journals
    Hidden Brain – Hidden Brain, Shankar Vedantam

    2

    Hidden Brain – Hidden Brain, Shankar Vedantam Science
    How To Do Everything

    3

    How To Do Everything Science
    Hidden Brain

    4

    Hidden Brain Games & Hobbies
    Something You Should Know

    5

    Something You Should Know Education
    Sword and Scale – Sword and Scale

    6

    Sword and Scale – Sword and Scale Alternative Health
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights