SUMMARY OF HOUSE DESCRIPTIONS
House Solar Built Retrofit Male Female Owner Renter Size in Sq. Ft. Jan. Public Service/ Propane Jan. Heating Average/ Sq. Ft. Retrofit Greenhouse
A X X X 2400 $ 37 $1.54
B X X X 2000 Propane 2.15
C X X X 2700 115 4.26
D X X X 4000 48/Feb 1.20 X
E X X X 1520 42 2.76
F X X X 1950 72 3.69
G X X X 3400 140 4.12
H X X X 2800 195 6.96
I X X X 3700 109 2.95
J X X X 1520 49 3.22
K X X X 2300
L X X X 1800 60 3.33
M X X X 4200 123 2.93
N X X X 2200 72 3.27 X
0 X X X 2600 19 .73
P X X X 2200 134* 6.09 X
Q X X X 4200 90 2.14
R X X X 3500 140 4.00
S X X X 1100 60 5.45 X
T X X X 1900 Propane 3.63 X
U X X X 3100 60 1.90 X
V X X X 1950 55 2.80
W X X X 1700 70 4.12
X X X X 2700 90
Y X X X 4500 82 1.82
*Electric fence and heated stock tank
Greenhouse Separate Integral Greenhouse System Needs Daily Interaction Did Participate Daily Style: C=Contemporary T=Split-level, ranch, traditional V=Victorian D=Dome Residents A=Adults C=Children Devoted to Solar (Subjective Judgement)
X X C 2A X
X X C 2A, 1C X
X X C 1A,2C
X X X T 2A X
X C 1A
X C 2A, 2C
X X X c 2A,2C** X
X X c 2A, 3C
X X c 2A,2C
X c 2A
X X X c 2A, 1C X
X X T 5A X
X X X T 2A, 1C X
X X T 1A X
X X T 2A, 1C X
X X C 2A,2C X
X C 2A, 1C
X X X V 2A X
X X X C 2A X
X X T 2A,3C X
X C 3A
X X C 2A,2C X
X X X C 2A,2C X
University of Colorado at Denver
Interior Design and
Space Planning May 1981
SOLAR CONDOMINIUMS WINDING TRAIL VILLAGE
THESIS DESIGN PROJECT
INTERIOR DESIGN STUDENT PAPER-249 _!
3 1204 00255 6323
University of Colorado at Denver
A Master's Degree Design Thesis in Interior Design
PASSIVE SOLAR HOUSING: AN INTEGRATION OF USER SATISFACTION DATA INTO THE DESIGN OF RESIDENCES
Patricia J. Harris May 12, 1981
Submitted to Attila Lawrence,
Director of the Graduate Program in Interior Design
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1
II. LITERATURE SURVEY ................................... 2
Passive Solar Factors ............................. 7
Reasons People Select the Residences
They Do.......................................... 7
III. RESEARCH SURVEY ..................................... 9
Participants ...................................... 9
House Descriptions................................ 11
User Attitudes.................................... 22
General Features ............................... 22
Solar/Efficiency Features ...................... 31
Responses to Life Style Adaptations .... 39
IV. DESIGN IMPLICATIONS EXTRACTED FROM SURVEY ... 44
V. PROGRAM............................................. 48
VI. POST-OCCUPANCY EVALUATION .......................... 51
User Survey Form........................................ 53
Cost Analysis........................................... 57
Solar Figures........................................... 61
With the current demand to incorporate passive solar measures into the housing market (as well as into existing dwellings and commercial facilities), there is a need to define and recommend floor plans and specific interior materials that are efficient and comfortable and to identify solar measures that will function naturally with and be integrated with the home. The use of passive solar measures can help in the energy use of this nation. They can be very comfortable and aesthetically pleasing and meet the needs and preferences of -the market.
In order for anyone to design for the user of a passive solar residence, input from those people already living in such units is needed. By establishing user needs from factors identified from passive solar design, behavior science literature and user surveys, designs will result that are better and more marketable.
The goal of this project is to allow for the psychological, emotional and physical needs of the user.
When users participate in the planning process, they feel they have some control (Wandersman, 1979). The value of this is substantiated by Halprin (1974) and Sanoff (1975). Alexander in the Oregon Experiment argues for as much user participation as possible. Vroom (1960) feels that people want to participate because of a need for independence.
Wandersman (1979) says the participating user will feel more creative, helpful, responsible, important, less anonymous, and less alienated. Residents are more satisfied when their particular values and needs are congruent with their environment. Even though individual user participation in speculative housing is usually considered impractical, it is often possible to let buyers make choices of a decorative nature. Those choices do not affect the building of the space but they help the person feel the house is really their own.
An element which contributes to a person's sense of belonging in a place is that person's ability to make the
place personal; it must adapt to his/her unique needs (Sommer, 1969). Man needs interaction and exchanges with his physical environment; he attempts to organize his environment and maximize his freedom of choices (Proshan-sky, 1970). For a place to be adaptable, it must have variety (multiplicity of settings and spaces) and flexibility (Proshansky, 1970). This allows the resident to incorporate harmony, unity, balance, and excitement (Sommer, 1969) any way he wishes. The place then can respond to the users requirements for arousal (social interaction) or non-arousal (decreased social interaction), illumination and noise levels and time spent there (Becheal, 1977). A place responsive to user needs allows expansion or contraction, openness or withdrawal, extroversion or introspection (Cooper, 1974). Such a place provides a setting for individual expressionhe may perform or not perform (Cooper, 1974) .
Within this flexible personalized place, a person can relate to "markers from his previous experience." His home has symbols, signs and decoration that have meaning to him. These "landmarks" he has chosen give him a feeling of reality and orientation as well as a sense of security, ownership (Juhasz, 1979), and territoriality (Mehrabian, 1976) .
A person's needs have to do with securing recognition and orientation to one's place in society: esteem,
sense of belonging, and status (Heimsath, 1977). Home is the central place of one's self-image (Proshansky, 1970). One's house becomes a symbol of self (Cooper, 1974). It is one of his most noteworthy status symbols.
Another factor in evaluating a personal environment is its complexity or interest. To avoid mundane and nonstimulating places, the home should allow choices for the degree of complexity one wants. There should be allowances for variation in light intensity, acoustics and smells.
Other peripheral stimulations are also valuable: cultural indicators such as a sauna, work places of the right size and character, light and shadow, open spaces to rest the eyes, space for play, education, socializing and defense (Hall, 1974).. Other things that add complexity are color, textures and such items as aquariums, sculptures, fireplaces, mirrors and plants (Mehrabian, 1976).
Other human needs that should be considered in designing personally satisfying environments are a need for exterior light and air (Heimsath, 1977) and a touch with outdoors and greenery (Juhasz, 1979). The geometry of spaces is a constant in architecture and behavior (Heimsath, 1977). This geometry must work with room adjacencies that simultaneously allow performance of human activity (Heimsath, 1977). Unrelated spaces should be separatesuch as food supply, defense, disposal of wastes, etc. (Hall, 1974). Corridors are needed to connect all the spaces (Heimsath, 1977) and help facilitate function.
When the living space being designed is to house not just a single person or household unit but a cluster of such units in a condominium, the designer needs to be especially aware of another set of issues. In high density settings people may feel crowded. There are two main ways to deal with feelings of crowding. One is to facilitate the individual identity and the other is to provide for positive interaction.
Individual identity is promoted when the individual households are given distinction. This can be done by providing individual entrances that are distinctive, single and clear-cut. This tells the world that this is "private" (Heimsath, 1977). In America the threshold is the front door. The area immediate to the front door can be designed to emphasize the individuality of the entrance. Space should be provided for plants, a bench or sculpture to allow for personalizing the space. Even a place to remove boots and shoes helps to make a statement of ownership and privacy. These private outside entrances also help establish territorial definitions and therefore are better maintained (Becker, 1974). The area immediate to the threshold is semi-public and helps in the transition from public to private (Cooper, 1974). This implies that it is safe and secure (Becker, 1974). Noise is another violation of feelings or privacy. Providing non-parallel entrances and
adjoining walls with parallel activities helps to reduce this. Considerations for visual as well as auditory privacy are needed on the interior.
To provide positive interaction to reduce feelings of congestion and crowding, common areas need to be planned. "High-density housing must be offset by a high level of interaction with one's neighbors. Otherwise presences of so many people nearby may become oppressive." (Hartman, 1963). This is one reason clubhouse facilities are being planned and used by condominiums. This and other shared space provides for neighborhood cohesiveness (Mehravian, 1976, p. 110).
Other ways of providing semi-public space that provides opportunity for neighbors to interact is by landscaping and beautifying areas contiguous to parking and to individual entrances.
On this project we are considering the needs of individuals and groups within a particular set of design constraints: passive solar construction. In this case the
semi-public land can serve the multiple function of play and socializing while being held open for solar access.
This shared space can be exterior to the structure or it can be partially or completely enclosed as courtyard or solarium.
Passive Solar Factors
Passive solar design is receiving increasing interest from many user groups: buyer, builder, and energy conservation groups. Inherent in passive solar design is using the building elements as solar components. The building becomes the collector. The heat must be captured through windows, roof monitors or greenhouses. Allowances must be made for visibility, ventilation and natural illumination. South facing windows must have overhangs for summer shading and interior insulation to reduce heat loss at night (Solar Dwelling Design Concepts, 1976).
Living spaces should face the sun because of the direct heat gain and the use of those spaces during the day (Wright, 1978). Away from the sun should be the garage, utility areas, storage (Wright, 1978) and stairs (Franklin Research Center, 1979). Bedrooms are generally kept cooler and therefore could easily be on the north side.
Temperatures for comfort should be between 68-72 for living areas, 65-70 in the kitchen and 75 and above in bathrooms (Egan, 1975) Rather than maintaining 75 in the bathrooms, auxilliary heaters that could be turned on only when needed could be used.
Reasons People Select Residences They Do
In order to design for people's needs, it is also helpful to understand why they make the housing choices they do. According to Whitbread (1978) different responses
to different residential environments are due to "individual differences in taste" and "requirements for attributes of alternatives" not to personal and household characteristics. Most choices are due to proximity to work and cost (Whitbread, 1978) .
In Boulder, the major factor seems to be cost.
Three realtors interviewed concurred that economics is the big factor. They all said that many buyers come to them with the idea of living in a solar home but few buy one because there are so few assumable loans available. Also, builders are selling "passive solar" houses at about ten per cent more per square foot than non-passive solar houses. So, between few assumable loans, high interest rates and higher initial costs, solar housing is not selling as fast as conventional housing in Boulder.
However, even with these potential problems, builders and people who are planning their own custom homes are choosing to build passive solar houses. This may be partially motivated by an interest in national conservation and the desire to save on fuel costs. But whatever the reason, it is happening evidenced by the fact that there are numerous "solar" developments* in Boulder County.
*Winding Trails, Greenwood Commons and Wildwood are examples.
As indicated by this literature review, specific data about the needs of actual residents of passive solar homes is not yet available. The Solar Energy Research Institute has recognized the need for such data and they are now conducting a nationwide study. Preliminary data indicated a wide variety of responses. They are finding that specific areas of the country have unique responses and suggest that a survey with Boulder residents of passive solar housing would be useful. This survey has been carried out with a modified version of their questionnaire form.
The survey consisted of personal interviews with 25 residents of Boulder County passive solar houses. There were 17 houses that were planned, built and marketed as passive solar residences. The remaining eight people interviewed had retrofitted their homes. Six of the retrofits had added greenhouses and two had retrofitted in other ways.
The original participation came from the Winding Trail Patio homes on Northbrook Drive, Boulder. The survey expanded to include anyone in Boulder County who lived in a
house with passive solar features who was willing to be interviewed. All but one of the people approached were willing to be interviewed.
Ten males who worked full time, eight females who worked full or part time, and seven full time homemakers were interviewed. Household income before taxes ranged from $10,000 to over $50,000:
NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS INCOME
1 - $10,000- $20,000
5 20,000- 30,000
7 30,000- 40,000
3 40,000- 50,000
8 Over $50,000
One survey for each household was taken and generally only one member of each household was interviewed. Eighteen participants were married; they represent three couples without children, four couples with one child, seven couples with two children, and two couples with three children. One couple lived with one other unrelated adult and one lived with three other related adults. Seven participants were single; three lived with one other adult, one lived with two other unrelated adults and two lived with three other unrelated adults, and one was a single parent who lived with her two children.
Twenty-three of the participants are owners and the other two are renters. The two renters are distinctly different in their attitudes. One is a young single woman
who did not participate in any way with the solar features but was aware of the benefits. Several times in the interview she indicated that the system must work because the temperature was very comfortable and her utility bills indicated that the system worked. The other renter is a priest and lives in a parish provided house. The congregation renovated the parish house, and as part of the renovation they added a combination thermosyphon and trombe wall as a "witness to energy conservation." The priest participated daily in the opening and closing of thermal drapes.
There were twenty single family dwellings and five condominiums. They all had attached garages or immediately adjacent parking areas.
The sizes of the houses ranged from 1100 square feet to 4500 square feet of living space. Most of the houses had unfinished areas but those areas were not counted in the size.
Number of Total Square Feet Square Feet of
Homes of House Separate Greenhouses
1 1100 100
2 1520 160
1 1800 262
3 1950 160 (3)
1 2100 1000
3 2200 684, 400
1 2400 100
1 2600 1440
Number of Homes
Total Square Feet of House
Square Feet of Separate Greenhouses
House styles can be grouped into four categories: Victorian, traditional, contemporary, innovative. There was one Victorian retrofit. Eight houses surveyed were traditional in styling, ranch or split level; two of these were solar built and six were retrofits. One of the most efficient solar built houses had the most traditional form. It was a ranch style foam house that enclosed a patio the length of the house on the South side. It was quite traditional in its three bedroom floor plan and in its exterior red brick facade. The greenhouse patio had a hot tub and concrete floor for storage; this generally heated the entire house. There were not special ventsonly opening windows and doors into the house for direct gain.
At night the resident pulled thermal drapes across the southern glazing. For auxiliary heat, he used a wood-burning fireplace that was connected to hot water heat throughout the house.
Fifteen of the houses would be considered contemporary in design; fourteen of these were solar built and one
was a retrofit. Several of these owners indicated that the
next solar house they build will be even less conventional in styling. They are very aware of the possibilities in non-conventional design form and state that they had previously felt inhibited by wanting to be as conventional as their neighbors.
The final house surveyed was a dome. It was solar built but it seemed to be no more efficient than the more conventional forms. These housing types are summarized below.
House Style Solar Built Retrofit
Traditional 2 6
Contemporary 14 1
Total 17 8
The value of the houses was generally difficult to estimate. Solar built houses ranged from $110,000 to $175,000; retrofits ranged from $120,000 to $200,000. The actual cost of the retrofits were highly variable depending on how much of the material was recycled and how much work was done by the owner. The figures given ranged from $3.65 per square foot to $40 per square foot. The parish house retrofit also included extensive insulation and cost $18,000. The number of houses within each price category are listed
Number of Houses Price Category
Solar Built: 1 $ 53,000
Retrofit: 1 110,000
2 Couldn't Say
Retrofits Actual Cost:
$ 2,500 (did work themselves) 684 Square Feet
3,500 (did work themselves) 170 Square Feet
16,000 (contracted out) 400 Square Feet
18,000 (contracted out) retrofit and insulate
The houses that were retrofitted were built from around 1910 until 1970. All the solar built houses were built after 1970; the most recent was built four months previous to the study. There were three houses that had been using passive solar systems for over four years, and one that had only been used a month. Most residents indicated they were still working on their houses and were planning to "finish" someday. All the participants were the original users of the passive solar systems. Dates houses were built and retrofitted are summarized below.
Date Houses Were Built
Number of Houses
3 Around 1910
2 June 1979
3 September 1979
3 March 1980
3 June 1980
1 November 1980
2 December 1980
Date Houses Were Retrofitted
5 August 1980
1 November 1980
Length of Time Solar Has Been Used
3 Over 4 years
7 Over 1 year
3 9 months to a year
8 6 months to 9 months
3 3 months to 6 months
1 1 month to 3 i months
It is difficult to summarize the passive solar systems because of the variety of combinations. Most systems used southern glazing in a greenhouse or solarium area where there was direct gain and indirect gain into a mass floor, mass wall or contained water (swimming pool, spa or water barrels). About half had separate collection areas that could be closed off at night. Most systems also had vents with or without fans that pushed the heated air into other areas of the house. Some systems also circulated heated air
into rock storage. These systems seem to work well if the solarium was totally contained and allowed to overheat. Two retrofit owners felt that the air ducted to rock storage did not work well and they felt that this was because the greenhouses were open as part of the living area and therefore virtually never over-heated.
There were three houses with trombe walls. One of these systems was in the dome house. This house had no southern glazing as the whole southern exposure was the trombe wall. This system was not totally passive as it was connected to a heat pump that was thermostatically controlled. This system required no daily interaction with the resident and was adequately efficient ($3.33/square foot*).
Another fairly common arrangement was a floor plan that had an open second floor and a "chimney" arrangement whereby a thermostatically controlled fan would turn on and pull the heated air that had collected at the peak through rock storage in the north side of the house or downstairs. Sometimes this was through interior ducting and sometimes it was through an open stairwell.
Seventeen of the houses surveyed were built as passive solar; eight were retrofits. Passive solar features incorporated are listed below.
*This figure was based on the heating period of about mid-December to mid-January, 1981, divided by square feet.
Number of Responses
Passive Solar Features
Indirect gain: 50 gal. water barrels: 3
10 gal. water barrels: 1
spa or pool (1600 gal.): 2
rock/concrete floor: 5
tile/flagstone floor: 8
brick floor: 3
brick wall: 5
Green House: rock storage 5
Direct Gain: doors/windows into
vents into house: 1
Southern double pane glazing for direct gain
Solarium/greenhouse as part of living space; one with living area as balcony overlooking solarium.
Interior vents with ducts throughout house Open upstairs Slant windows Sunscoops
2-story greenhouse; one with balcony eating area
Central fan system
Trombe Wall; 2 with vents and fans
Fireplaces tied to heat systems Heat pumps
Triple pane glass on west, north, east windows
Thermosyphone made with foundation
Specially treated glass
600 gal. hot water storage in basement for domestic hot water
Active solar collectors were in use in four of the houses surveyed. Two had wood stoves tied to the auxiliary heat and eight had active domestic hot water systems.
Very few respondents had any figures of what percentage of heat they expected to gain from the passive solar system. Of those who did, one expected only 10 per cent; two, 30 per cent; three, 50 per cent; two, 60 percent; one, 90 percent; and one anticipated that eventually they expected a full 100 per cent except for ten consecutive days with no sun.
Sixteen of the respondents mentioned specific R-values of walls or ceilings or just that it was a "super-insulated" house. One participant had kept detailed studies of his fuel usage and had insulated the rest of his house the year after he had added his greenhouse. The additional insulation had had a bigger effect on his fuel savings than the greenhouse addition. Obviously insulation has a large single effect. Listed below are the ceiling R-values that the respondents volunteered.
Number of Houses Ceiling R-Values
Other energy efficient items mentioned were floor plan factors like placing garages and bedrooms on the north side and living areas on the south side, openness for air circulation, thicker doors, special glass, double pane and triple pane windows, heat pumps, wood stoves, energy-efficient fireplaces, overhangs, exterior shading, north
side berming and limiting glazing on the north and west sides. The people in these houses were generally thinking of using everything possible to help heat their homes inexpensively.
Almost everyone was planning additional items to improve their system. Several were planning night insulation, adding more mass or adding fans or vents.
SUMMARY OF BASIC PASSIVE SOLAR SYSTEMS
House Direct Gain Only Some Floor/Wall Storage Rock Storage Deliberate Mass for Storage Water Trombe Wall Comments
A Floor X
B X Needs more
D X X Mostly direct gain
Only 100 gals.
G X Wall Too light in color
Needs more effective
K X Wall
L X Trombe wall only gain
M X Pool
N X Not good; feels direct
gain most useful
0 X X Spamostly direct gain
Q X Wall/floor
W X X
X X Circulates air
Y X Circulates air
With this we move from the characteristics of the users and descriptions of their houses to the feelings and attitudes of the residents. Reasons given for purchasing a passive solar home are categorized below.
Degree of Importance
Very Somewhat Not Too Not At All
To save on fuel costs 20 5
Exterior appearance (No, but now it is important.) 6 8 4 7
National Energy conservation 8 10 2 5
To have a greenhouse for gardening 7 9 1 8
To protect family against fuel shortages 12 9 1 4
To use renewable energy sources 15 9 1
To have an attractive environment (No, but is now.) 12 11 1 1
Payback period (Don't believe it is too different from a conventional home) 4 8 4 9
Hobby Interest 7 5 2 11
Floor design (It is natural.) (Because of our habits.) 12 8 0 5
To have the luxury of warm rooms without extra costs 10 7 1 7
Being close to nature 1 10 1 13
To provide a more comfortable environment (Wasn't then, but is now) 14 12 1 3
To increase value of the house 6 13 1 5
Other less frequently cited factors:
Makes sense, self-contained; easy way to live Cost of comfort is accelerating (2)
Most important was potential resale Tax incentive (4)
Wanted a house with a swimming pool and solar was the only way to afford it.
Wanted to set an example (2)
Wanted to be independent of Public Service Wanted to build underground and couldn't, so this is next best.
Wanted to brag. It is novel.
The greenhouse was important and then solar became more important as the project progressed.
These reasons for selecting a passive solar house
are only a subset of the reasons given for building or
buying their particular house. These reasons are given
8 Floor plan
7 Wanted a passive system
3 Comfort without high bills
3 Energy consciousness example
2 Reputation of the builder
1 Total heating
1 To set an energy consciousness example 1 Quality of construction
1 Subdivision amenities
1 Character of house
1 We built to suit our family
1 Wanted a swimming pool
1 Wanted a dome house
1 Had lived in R-56 and wanted the same efficiency
1 It was the right price
1 Wanted a contemporary house
Reasons for the decision to retrofit are more focused
on energy consideration as indicated by the rank order given
5 Energy considerations 3 Heat gain
2 Enlarge living area 1 Humidity control 1 Air purifier
1 For gardening
1 Hobby 1 Save money
1 Greenhouse is very human
Even though energy consciousness is of importance in evaluating passive solar houses, there is no clear cut basis for such a comparison. One possibility is to divide the heating cost by the square feet of living space heated.
This of course does not take into account different lifestyles, insulation or number of people living in the house, but it seems to be the best method available. Therefore, the Public Service bills, from mid-December to mid-January, 1980-81, were divided by square feet. The range is from $ .73 to $6.96 per square foot. The average was $3.27.
Focusing mainly on fuel costs, twelve people, or about half, said that the house was what they expected.
Ten said it was even better than they expected. One person was disappointed saying that the fuel bills were higher than expected; another said that it took a year of adjustment but that it is now what he expected.
When asked to compare the present house with the last place they lived, all respondents were very much more pleased with this house. The ones who answered enthusiastically "no comparison!" did so because they had moved from a family situation with seven children to a single lifestyle, from a New York storefront, or from a single room.
The real comparisons came from the retrofitters because they were able to compare the house before and after retrofitting.
The retrofitters by and large were much warmer. But the biggest positive comments were about aspects that were a result of being warmeraspects they had not expected.
One man said, "The use of the rooms has changed; we have doubled our house use in winter because of the passive heat." And a woman was very happy because it had increased the individual privacy because the whole house is usable now. The other positive changes were comments about more family interaction, less television and more energy conscientiousness since they had retrofitted.
Below is a summary of reasons given for preferring
this house to the last residence.
6 Open space floor plan is better
4 More comfortable temperature
4 No comparison 3 Sunlight/brightness better 3 Humidity better
3 Same cost to heat half the space in the last place 2 Better built
2 This is more compact and efficient 2 Location is better 2 This is larger
2 This is a different lifestyle
2 Lower bills here 1 Last house was not insulated 1 This is less drafty
1 Easier to entertain
1 Like the "energy flow" inside the house 1 Architecture is better here
1 We doubled the use of the house when we retrofitted.
Things they do not like in comparison to last place
are listed below. These were all single answers.
Last house better built This laundry room too small Lots of little things Bedrooms are too small Kitchen too small Too hot in summer Don't like the stairs
Don't like the bugs from the greenhouse.
The birds eat the outside of the house (dome house).
The technological aspects are still unsure.
Temperature swings are too severe Heating zones are funny Builder idiosyncracies Miss the old neighborhood
Don't like the location of the laundry room ft Had a 2-car garage
When asked whether they thought the floor plan was different because of the passive solar features the responses were very interesting. Their responses occasionally contradicted the result of observation. For instance, the gentleman who had built the traditional looking ordinary brick ranch responded with an enthusiastic "Yes!" But it was a traditional L-shaped living/dining room three bedrooms plan. True, it did not have a furnace and it was a foam house, but it looked very conventional. Then there were several people who's houses had been planned with underground bedrooms, garages on the north, open stairwells and openings into upstairs areas either with "cut-outs" or central light/heat wells, greenhouses or solariums as focal points of their houses that responded that they didn't think their houses were different because of the solar features.
Detailed below are the ways the respondents felt their floor plan was different because of the passive solar features.
4 Because of the solar features 2 South kitchen area
1 French doors to close off solarium 1 Solar wall (Trombe wall in the dome house)
1 Bedrooms on the north, living south 1 No windows on the east and west (also good for wind control)
1 Has light chimney into back of house 1 Light (sun) penetrates much more into the interior 1 Left windows off the north
1 Central brick fireplace (also used for mass)
1 The floor plan was adjusted because of the solar.
It is different and not as livable because of it. But it is acceptable because it was done for solar reasons.
13 Total yes
Twelve people felt the floor plan was no different because of passive solar features. Two people qualified their "no" answers with "no, but it is open and responsive to the sun" and "no, but we use it differently."
Residents liked the following things about their present floor plan.
4 Family room and kitchen are adjacent 4 Like sequence of kitchen/dining room/living room 4 Southern/sunny exposure 4 Light
2 Low ceilings and coziness 2 Compact
1 Master bedroom is separate from the other two bedrooms
Strong indoor/outdoor relationship Based on traditional design values and then changed for Colorado
1 Sunscoops are becoming like a greenhouse 1 Easy for furniture arrangement 1 Homey 1 Convenient
1 Bedrooms in the basement
1 Separate dining room
1 Greenhouse is part of the living area 1 2-story living room 1 Three levels
1 Greenhouse off the master bedroom (Great way to start the day!)
1 Good for parties
1 2-story house, bedrooms up
1 Greenhouse is usable living space
The users disliked a number of different things about this house. It is interesting to note that only two responses were connected to solar features. Both those users were planning action to remedy their complaints.
2 Laundry room in the basement
2 Basement too small
1 Obsolescence of the Victorian floorplan
1 Center bathrooms with no windows
1 Garage enters into entry area and it is too
1 Need a little more individual privacy 1 Living room too close to the front door (no airlock and was cold)
1 Rather have it on one floor 1 Night insulation is an expensive problem 1 Needs a larger family/living room
1 Not deep enough, need two more feet for circulation
1 Kitchen too small and not enough storage 1 Would like southern windows (dome house, trombe wall)
1 Could be more exciting
Following is an evaluation of the floor plan in relation to specific categories.
Favorable Acceptable Unfavorable
Favorable Acceptable Unfavorable
Enough storage 15 7
Not distributed well Would be better with an attic and/or basement
Not in the kitchen
Good outdoor access 24 1
Enough windows 24 1
Sequential plan 25
The users were asked whether their choice of fur-
nishings, floor coverings or window treatments were affected by the fact that they have a passive solar system. Seven people said "no." These people were those who had moved into a finished residence and felt they had not chosen any of the finishing. However, it appeared that the solar features had not been taken into account in only two situations. One of those was asking a lot of questions about
window coverings and carpet fading. Perhaps her responses would be different if interviewed again in six months.
Below are comments from several of the seven people who said they had not considered the solar aspects when choosing furnishings.
"No, however, I do have insulated shades."
"No, but I am considering exterior shading."
"No, but I am still considering the permanent flooring in the greenhouse."
Three other "no" responses seemed to have considered furnishings because they chose cheap, replaceable fabrics for their greenhouses. Also choice of light, airy chairs seemed to be compatible with the greenhouses.
Several people had been frustrated in trying to make choices to complement the solar system. They had researched materials and felt they knew what they wanted, but could not find it to buy. Several respondents also had opted not to put in the best option in terms of solar control because of maintenance, cost or aesthetics.
The main consideration was in dealing with window treatments. Several systems were incomplete because they had not made choices for night time insulation. They verbalized costs and aesthetics objections, but also there was concern for having to be involved in a twice daily routine if it were inconvenient. As a result, nothing had been done.
Below is a list of the different things that had been done in response to the solar features.
3 Chose fabric for durability in sun
"I expect some deterioration. It really is the same as it would be in a conventional home with southern windows."
2 Chose tile for heat retention
2 Brick in greenhouse
2 Aware of potential problems, but put in carpet anyway
1 Put in hardwood throughout house because of deterioration of carpeting.
1 Should have chosen brick, but put in vinyl for maintenance
1 Should have chosen something else but chose carpeting because of aesthetics.
4 Levolors/blinds for glare control and durability 3 Mylar shades 2 Window quilts 2 Insulated drapes 2 Vertical slates for sun control 1 Added exterior shading 1 Have movable insulation
"Window quilts are too expensive and do not control glare."
"I should have been more aware of color choices because I chose colors that are too cool."
"There is a lack of suitable insulating window treatments so I don't have any."
It was difficult to get an accurate understanding of the respondents interaction with their houses. Some people were totally energy conscious. Their life style revolves around it while others were working toward having a system that required no daily interaction. They were asked about exterior shading or other screening devices, reflector panels, vents and fans, movable insulation including drapes, shades, shutters, etc., and any other daily or seasonal components that require manual operation. The respondents almost always said they did nothing. So they were then asked about some element they had mentioned. Then they remembered. By and large, the routines are so natural and part of their lives they hardly noticed. One family had rigid insulation (stored in an entry contiguious to the greenhouse) which was definitely part of the total system.
This daily routine was habit, and they enjoyed it as a family activity. One other respondent said it was quite a job putting down the window quilts every night, and it wouldn't get done if her husband didn't do it every day.
Several people responded that they only did the complete insulation when it was cold enough for them to notice the rooms cooling down. Fourteen just closed off the greenhouse area from the living space. Six were aware that the nighttime insulation would greatly improve their system but as yet they had done nothing. Two of those six thought they had settled on what they wanted but hadn't purchased them yet. Convenience and storage were two problems (along with cost) that seemed to be the major reasons they had not done anything.
In the table below, there are comments under each category several people made concerning the individual components.
Shading or other screening devicesexterior Use regularly (3)
Want to add
Plant sunflowers in summer (2)
Have overhangs Reflector panels
Want to add (2)
Use daily (1)
Seasonal (twice yearly) (7)
Need more for summer venting (1)
Not too convenient, so adding electric damper (1)
Do Do Not
Quilts are convenient, always use (1) Wovaaks, use daily (1)
Drapes, but use only when cold (2)
Plan to have thermex covers (will use as wall hangings when not in use) (1) Takes 2 people, 10-15 min. daily (2) Close doors to greenhouse, easy, don't notice it. (1)
Other daily or seasonal routines:
Water down greenhouse for humidity daily (1)
Close shades throughout house daily (2) Run humidifier (1)
Do Do Not Have Have
Thirteen of the respondents felt that the passive solar system was their primary heating source, one felt that it was 50/50 and eleven felt it was a secondary heating source. Of those who responded that it was secondary, two also said they never turned on their heat, and two felt that a wood-burning stove was their primary heat.
To get an indication of satisfactions about specific aspects of passive solar homes, the residents were asked about their level of satisfaction with ten features dealing with solar details. As indicated below the people interviewed were generally very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the aspects questioned.
Very Satis- fied Some- what Satis- fied Not Too Satis- fied Not At All Satisfied
Comfort level "Still working on it" Energy savings "Really, need more 19 6
storage." (5) Interior design Effort and time required 17 16 5 9 1 2
in daily operations "Every day is a ritual. I like it." "Takes 10-15 minutes a day." "Working towards totally automatic." Little effort (9) 16 8 1
Heat distribution "Need to increase insulation on south walls." "We're still 'tuning.'" 15 8 1 1
Exterior design "South ok, north is blah." 15 9 1
Maintenance requirements Performance of mechani- 13 10 2
cal components Don't have any (3) Heat pump problems (2) 11 6 3
Cooling distribution "Don't know yet." (4) 9 7 3 2
Humidity control "Doesn't have any." (5) 4 14 2
Generally there was a total awareness of energy efficiency throughout their homes. Below is a list of other energy efficient items and their reactions to their use.
Most homes did not have every one. However, they were generally satisfied with them except for heat storage.
fied OK fied
Greenhouse/solarium area Cool at night (3)
Exterior landscaping specifically designed for solar control Fireplace (15)
Not efficient (6)
Recirculates air into rock storage Glass doors Exterior air intake Recirculates air (fan)
Below grade bedrooms Different, but OK Good in summer (2)
Very quiet (2)
Even temperatures Stove (wood-burning)
Not too efficient Recirculates hot water Sun Scoops/Roof Monitors Heat Storage (18)
Masonry mass Water barrels/wall Trombe wall Water pool/spa Need more (5)
9 6 6
1 Storm windows
1 Recirculation fan throughout house by ducts 1 Set-back thermostat
1 North berming
1 Tight house
1 Cooks on stove if a fire already lit
No comments were made if the residence did not have the item.
Since there are some generally known potential problems with passive solar houses, the participants were asked about some specific items. Below are figures on whether people felt they had good daylighting throughout their houses.
3 Not too good
2 North rooms poor
2 Would like additional windows in particular rooms
1 West side of house poor
They were also asked about whether they felt their houses had adequate privacy inside and out.
23 Good (2 responded that the blinds make it as private
as they wish.)
1 When the fence is built, it will be more private.
1 When the house next door is built, it will be more
1 Am waiting for the shrubbery to grow. Then it will be private.
Humidity control is another problem often experienced in passive solar homes, especially ones with greenhouses. Obviously climate has a lot to do with humidity control. Almost everyone answered "What humidity?" Even with large greenhouses in Boulder there generally was not a humidity problem. In fact, several responded that the greenhouse had helped bring the humidity up to where it should be. Several people felt the humidity had been beneficial to their health. (One respondent hosed down his greenhouse
every morning to bring the humidity up to where he wanted it.) Two people had had a problem with excessive humidity. One of those was the owner of the swimming pool. He had solved the problem by using a pool cover. He initially had put the cover on to control humidity and found that it also helped to modify the temperature swings as well. The builder of the one greenhouse that still had humidity problems had decided not to do anything about it. It was definitely a problem because the windows in the entire house had condensation on them and it was 60 outside. This greenhouse had been built for extensive indoor gardening and had had solar built as a part of it but not because of the solar gain. The owner felt she had developed sinus problems because of the humidity.
As you can see in the following table, the problems that people had experienced seemed to be accepted easily as part of the system. This further validates the position of writers such as Wandersman (1979), Sanoff (1975) and Halprin (1974) when they postulate that when people are involved in the planning and are able to make their own choices, they are more accepting and are more satisfied.
Close shades/blinds (2) Moved TV (2)
Use golf umbrella shade
Accept it (2)
Have Not Have Had Had Problem Problem
Have Had Had Problem Problem
Excessive humidity Learn to live with it Use towels on window sills Put cover on pool Open windows 3 22
Condensation on windows It's OK (2) Changed window sealsOK now Put cover on pool 7 18
Stagnant odors House too tight, getting air cleaner Open windows and air out Most odors are good because of the sunshine 2 23
Fading of furniture, walls or coverings Yes, but easy to replace Moved chair I expected it, so no action planned Chair covered again Control with shades 4 21
Lack of privacy Use shades when needed (2) 25
Drafts Working on it (2) 2 23
Rooms cool down too fast As long as I use nighttime insulation, no problem Close doors Wish it were better Not too serious (3) Need to insulate better; that will help. (2) 5 20
Not warm enough Build fire (3) Dress warmer (3) Have down comforter on bed (3) 5 20
Have Not Have Had Had Problem Problem
Extreme temperature swings We allow it (3)
Have added mass to control Just move to another room (2)
A problem I like to have Open doorsneed more mass
Weatherstripping or caulking Have had to redo (2)
Covering sloped windows
Put bamboo shades on exterior in slimmer Window quilts (2)
Manual shades on interior (3)
Had sloped windows and took them out (1)
Slates take care of summer heat Just did it, no problem Plan to cover with insulated foam on track Haven't dealt with yet (3)
Machanical/electrical system failure Not applicable (3)
Heat pump problems (2)
Plumbing pipes brokenot solar Hard to arrange furniture Problems with infiltration
Had real temperature swings of 40 to 110 so took out slanted windows in greenhouse.
Water in basement
Responses to Life Style Adaptations
"What changes have you noticed in your life style or behavior since you've been in a passive solar house?" was the last question in the interview. There were generally two responses : an immediate and enthusiastic one or a blank look. In response to the blank look, they were asked how they felt about living there. All respondents
really liked their houses and felt good about being there. Several people said they were now just more aware: aware of energy uses (5), of daily and seasonal changes, or plant changes ("You know right where the sun is by watching the plants in the greenhouse."), and more sensitive to life (3).
A lot of the positive behavioral comments were from men who really enjoyed being aware of seasons, plants and weatherthey were experiencing good feelings about being a part of nature, by being more sensitive to daily changes. This reaction is probably a result of what Juhasz (1979) calls adding variety and stimulation and therefore excitement into routines.
Other statements seem to indicate that people's behavior in this passive solar house has had a positive effect on the family. Comments like "My husband calls me during the day to remind me to open vents," "I'm not so grouchy in the morning because I'm not coldI get along better with the family" and "Solar has become a common interest" along with the several comments about following the warmth and watching less television seem to indicate that this house has brought more togetherness to the family.
A majority of respondents also alluded to their feelings of self-esteem. They felt very positive about being in a passive solar house, that they were able to be a witness to energy conservation and that they affected some control over their personal comfort.
There was only one negative comment and that has been previously discussed. The comment was "The humidity has caused me some sinus problems."
The individual responses are listed below. You will notice similarities about some answers. They generally fall into three categories:
Attitudes to do with self-esteem and feeling good emotionally Family interactions
Otherwise, the answers seem to be very individual.
5 We are more energy consciousa positive feeling.
4 All changes have been positive.
3 Basically we enjoy all the changes and awarenesses.
3 I am more sensitive to the sun, seasons, weather,
2 No changes
2 We interact with the house and enjoy it.
2 We have a bonus: kitchen is on the east, so don't turn on the heat in the early morning.
2 We keep the temperature cooler now.
2 We put on more clothes now.
2 We have good feelings about the house.
2 We have good feelings about doing things that matter
to our personal comfort.
2 No real changes. We have always been aware of energy usage. It just makes good sense.
2 We like being a witness to energy conservation.
2 I enjoy more time spent in plant care.
2 I find family migrates to sunny areas of house.
2 Family doesn't watch TV as much because they prefer to be in the sunny places.
2 More conscientious about doors, fireplace, etc.
2 We have adjusted to temperature swings.
2 We all are healthier!
2 Everyone is happier.
2 Plants help in the seasonal awarenesses.
1 House was built to respond to present life styles.
1 We use patio when it is too cool to be outside in a conventional house.
1 We follow the heat, go downstairs when it is cool upstairs.
1 We can get out of bed in the middle of the night and not be cold as before.
1 The use of the rooms has changed; we have doubled our house use in winter because of the passive heat.
1 It has increased our individual privacy because the the whole house is warm now.
1 Our life style revolves around the sun now.
1 We have awareness of controlswhich is good.
1 We feel the awareness of daily and seasonal changes has added variety to our lives.
1 -We are now concerned about drying clothes, taking long showers, etc.
1 I now hang out my clothes to dry.
1 Husband now calls to ask if I've remembered to open the vents, etc. I like that family caring because it has carried over into other areas of our lives.
1 I now pull shades for privacy.
1 I have more room to entertain. (This person did not attribute that to the solar measures, but it has a lot to do with the floor plan which is responsive to solar.
1 I feel conventional homes lack an "energy flow."
1 My life style is not conventional and therefore I like my house to project that.
1 I am much less crabby because I am not cold. I get along better with my family.
1 I am generally pleased.
1 I use a hot tub because I'm not paying extra to heat it.
1 It's been like adding rooms because we are using areas we couldn't use before.
1 Solar has become a common interest in our family.
1 I like the energy flow.
1 I build more fires.
1 I love the sunshine in the house.
1 I am glad to help in national conservation.
1 Humidity has caused sinus problems.
Conclusions from the interviews reflect the idea that the "participant user" will be building a custom home and need not be considered for speculative condominiums. The question of who buys a passive solar already existing unit is more applicable. In Boulder, it is someone who likes an attractive contemporary style, open floor plans, efficient heating/cooling for minimum monthly cost, and a
system that is self-perpetuating (requires little interaction.) It must be flexible enough, however, for those individuals who want to have a direct part in energy conservation to be able to make it even more efficient by their involvement.
DESIGN IMPLICATIONS EXTRACTED FROM THE SURVEY
There were two users "models" that came out of the interviews: the non-participant and the involved. There
were two categories of the non-participating users. One category was the non-participant who was very satisfied because she did nothing but her utility bill reflected that the passive solar was working. Her unit was a very efficient hybrid greenhouse and sunscoop system that ducted the heat into rock storage. It was totally automatic except for vent changes twice a year. It was also efficient because she didn't interfere with the system either. She left the windows and doors into the greenhouse closed during the day, so it overheated and fed into the rock storage for later.
The other category of non-participant had only one person in it also. The system did require daily user interaction to be efficient. Since this user had bought the house for the floor plan, she did not either understand nor participate with the system. Because of this noninteraction, the greenhouse probably was a heat loss instead of a gain. The potential was there, however, so she might eventually get it to work to an energy savings advantage.
After talking to a number of people who were involved with solar because of national conservation and because of costs, this researcher has concluded that there really are a lot of people who would like to be a part of energy conservation but don't want to participate in it daily. There were a number of people who were glad to be a "part of the movement" but had not done a total program. They have built the features, but do not use nighttime insulation, or do not let the greenhouses overheat sufficiently for any substantial storage, etc.
The conclusions, therefore, are as follows.
I. When designing for non-participating users, the system needs to be as efficient as possible with no daily interaction. This requires that there be either enough immediate mass or a system to vent excess heat into storage to prevent overheating.
This also requires the design to be such that anyone using the space does not interfere with the storage system. For instance, the design would eliminate the possibility of putting a large piece of furniture over a brick floor that was intended for storage. In other words, indirect gain storage must be placed so it won't be shaded.
To prevent cooling off too quickly at night, there needs to be a convenient, efficient and aesthetically viable method of covering glazing that everyone would use.
This can be done either by providing an area that is almost exclusively for heating and is used incidentally, or it could be an area that has multipurpose. In the case of using it as part of the living area, it must be very specifically designed to prevent the extreme temperature swings and interference with the heat gain' capacities.
II. When designing for a client who will be using the space himself, then the choices can be made to the extent the user wants to participate. There are many choices and a variety of options available.
III. The observations also show that the aesthetics do not need to be a problem. There are now many different products on the market that fit all styles and all levels
of interaction. If a designer designs for a non-participant user, the furnishings, floors, and walls will be fairly conventional because if he does not conform to their standards, it will be changed and the system will be upset. This can be done with good design.
IV. In my opinion, there needs to be little, if any difference in costs of building a passive solar house and a conventional house. Insulation is the single big factor and, with current utility costs, all housing starts should be built with adequate insulation. Aside from insulation, there are features that are common sense and cost no extra if done when built, i.e., roof overhangs,
window size and placement, amount of southern glazing, air-lock entries, room arrangements and placements, etc.
V. Twenty-four of the twenty-five houses in the study were very acceptable in styling for the Boulder market. Conventional styles and floor plans are easily compatible with passive solar features. In other words, it does not have to be "way-out."
1 and 2 bedrooms
1.5 and 2 baths each
1.5 parking spaces each unit
Needs to be close to door (Not more than 200 feet) Cars need to be visible from apartment Needs to have a buffer zone between parking and units
Deck/outdoor private space for each unit Three different floor plans Separate entrances
Single, visible form No parallel entrances
Variation in shape, pattern, and form to increase individuality Staggered buildings Unique
Statement on quality of life, status, esteem
Brick or Brick and board indicates quality and durability
Extensive landscaping for solar control and common usage
Oriented towards view (SW)
Maximize warming in the winter Maximize shade in summer Reduce impact of wind in winter Allow circulation in summer
Position on slope for good solar radiation exposure Orientation on slope should be south to southwest Material coloration should be medium
Parking on the north side No obtrusive elements Each unit self-sufficient Enough mass to control temperature swings Provide circulation so north side of buildings also gets sun's benefits Glazing exposure on south If possible 90 per cent efficiency Insulationwall: R=22.0 (U=0.045)
ceiling: R=31.0 (U-0.032)
Unit requirements Physical
1 or 2 bedrooms
Kitchen with or without eating area Distinct dining area
Living room with energy efficient fireplace or stove
Thermally comfortablerange 50-80
Physical space800 square feet minimum Immediate access to deck/patio Immediate access to parking Maximum of 5 units per stairs at entrances Private outside entrances Increases security Are better maintained Reduces noise and therefore privacy Develops feelings of territory Maximum stairs 2 1/2 stories Ample storage
Auditory and visual privacy Materials
Need to be easy to maintain and clean Interiors with individual choice of colors Room size and arrangement Multilevel designs Bedroom minimum size 10' x 12'
Additional elements Indoor sunlight Entrance transition room Short passages Outdoor room Street windows 6' balcony Connection to earth Alcoves
Window place Fireplace/hearth Ceiling height variety Intimacy gradient
Psychological Requirements Secure
Well-lit, visual entrance Short distance from parking Visual privacy in interior Locked access Diversity for interest Visual choices
Multi-level entrances and interiors Personal aesthetic choices Paths, boundaries, edges "Markers from the past"
Traditional shapes within diversity Traditional spaces and rooms Traditional materials used Privacy/socialallows for intimacy gradient Choices and control "Touch with nature"
Provides for human expression
PLAN FOR POST-OCCUPANCY EVALUATION
Completion of the 30 condominiums is scheduled for summer 1982. All the units should be occupied by September of that year.
All residents of these 30 units will be interviewed at the end of winter. The original survey will be used with an additional section to see if the psychological needs were also addressed. The time needed for the interview will probably still be only 30 minutes; in the original survey much time was devoted to detailing the solar features which can be eliminated in the post-occupancy study.
The post-occupancy study will follow the same procedure for data collection and analysis of data as the original survey. A final report will be the outcome.
Residence built as "passive solar"
Date: Description of resident group: (and ages)
Respondent's description in living unit:
Yearly income before taxes: less than $10,000
20.000 - 30,000
30.000 - 40,000
40.000 - 50,000
Own house? Rent?
Description of residence: Single family
Price range, when new:
Date built: Date purchased/rented:
Are you the original occupant?
How many square feet:
What passive solar measures does this residence have? (describe processes)
Do you consider the passive solar system primary/secondary heating source?
What percent of heat do you expect to recover through passive measures? (What builder quoted)
What was your January, 1981 Public Service bill?
Please compare this residence with your previous residence. Do you like it better? Why/why not?
Is this residence what you expected?
What specifically made you buy/rent this unit?
Following is a list of factors that may have influenced your decision to have passive solar features in your home. Please tell me as I read them if they were very important, somewhat important, not very important or you did not consider.
National energy conservation
Being close to nature
Provide more comfortable environment
Have a greenhouse for indoor gardening
Increase value of house
Protect family against fuel shortage
Use renewable energy sources
Provide an attractive environment in which to live Recovery time of cost of passive solar features (payback period)
Save on fuel costs Exterior appearance Floor design
Luxury of warm rooms without extra costs Other factors:
Which of these was most important?
Now I would like to ask you about some specific items that may or may not be in your house. Please tell me if they are and how satisfactory they are.
Double-lock entry Greenhouse/solarium Below grade bedrooms
Energy-efficient fireplace (glass doors, exterior air intake)
Sun-scoops/roof monitors Heat storage
Exterior landscaping specifically for solar control Others?
Do you feel the floor plan is different because of the passive solar features? Do you like that?
What specific aspects of the floor plan to you like?
What specific aspects of the floor plan to you dislike?
Do you have good daylighting throughout the house? How far from parking areas are you?
Do you feel safe?
Do you have adequate privacy?
Please comment on the floor plan.
Convenient Spacious Enough storage Outdoor access
Enough windows? Sequential plan? Other
Was your choice of furnishing, floor coverings, or window treatments affected by the fact that you have a passive solar system? (describe)
Please indicate how satisfied (very, somewhat, not very, not at all) you are with these aspects of your passive solar home.
Exterior design of your house
Interior design of your house
General maintenance requirements
Effort and time required in daily operations
Performance of mechanical components
Some problems have been indicated by users of passive solar houses. If you have ever had these problems, please tell me how serious it was and if you did anything about it.
Excessive humidity Condensation on windows Stagnant odors
Fading of furniture, walls or coverings
Lack of privacy
Rooms cool down too fast
Not warm enough
Extreme temperature swings
Weatherstripping or caulking
Covering sloped windows
Mechanical/electrical system failure
There may be some components in your house that require manual operation. Please tell me if you have them and if they are inconvenient or so inconvenient that you don't operate them as often as you should.
Shading or other screening devices
Movable insulation Other
What changes have you noticed in your or your family's behavior/life style?
The projected cost for the condominiums is as
1 bedroom unit: $67,800
The upgraded furnishings over what the developer would provide (as shown on the sample boards) would cost an additional $566 for carpeting. Total cost of unit, upgraded carpeting and furnishings would come to $73,909.
2 bedroom/1 bath unit: $81,200
The upgraded carpeting would cost an additional $1500. Total cost of unit, upgraded carpeting and furnishings would come to $95,124.
2 bedroom/2 bath unit: $94,720 The upgraded carpeting would come to an additional $1667. Total cost of the unit would be $106,470.
Tufted sofa (2) Cane tub chair Lamp with glass tray (4) Ford's Theatre balloon back chair 42" round table Credenza
(2) Commode table Rectangular cocktail table Sleeper sofa Open bookcase
Rectangular cocktail table (2) Commode night table Chest
Tester bed 5'
Ladies Writing Desk Stereo base unit
Ethan Allen Cost
#20-7226-5 $ 749.50
TRANSITIONAL (CONTEMPORARY) UNIT
Item Manufacturer Number Cost
3 person seat Thayer-Goggin 2844 $ 692
2 person seat Thayer-Goggin 2843 512
Corner seat Thayer-Goggin 2842 392
End table Founders-Keeper Two 27121 348
Coffee table Dining fold-out Founders-Keeper Two 27120 385
table Founders-Keeper Two 27160 575
(4 l) Dining chairs Cosco 40-127 504
Occasional chair Cosco 50-124 218
Cane bedroom set Founders Patterns 45-
headboard 4501-455 275
armoire 4501-340 925
(2) nightstand 4501-820 530
Barrel swivel rocker Classic Gallery High Point
(style) 880 187
Item MODERN UNIT Manufacturer Number Cost
Dining table Contemporary Shells 1555 $ 301
(4) dining chairs Contemporary Shells 1538 560
(3) Living room chairs Saporiti Italia Vela 1,335
Tables Saporiti Italia Gambotta 1,081
coffee Saporti Italia Gambotta
end Saporti Italia Gambotta
Floor lamp Habitat 9592 750
Bed Arconas Togo Bed 2,288
Bedroom dresser Saporiti Italia Pellicono
Living room credenza Saporiti Italia lip II Pelion 889 1,800
Bed Saporiti Italia 1,123
3 drawer (short) Saporiti Italia 585
3 drawer (long) Saporiti Italia 696
(2) Hassock Saporiti Italia Vela 1,016
South glazing area Square feet (total)
136 square feet 1,184
Atrium windows Door
Outside wall Underground V = .018 x 3/4 (18,395,775) x 75 =
BTU/DD = l4:l3-l-3 .(.241 x 6016DD =
136. X .58 X 75 = 5 i , 916
37.5 X .58 X 15 = 326. ,25
21 X .49 X 15 = 154. .35
572 X. ,044 X 75 = 1, , 887. . 6
1,274 X .51 X 25 = 16, ,243. ,5
75 = 24, ,527. .7
24, ,834. .2963
Net thermal efficiency = 37,809,008
92 % solar contribution
South glazing area 167 square feet
Total square feet 848
North wall 263 .5 x .044 X 75 = 869.55
Outside wall 272 x .044 X 75 = 938.4
Outside windows 167 x .58 X 75 = 7,264.5
Atrium windows 21 x .58 X 15 = 182.7
Doors 21 x .49 X 15 = 154.4
V = 3/4 (7200) x .018 x 75 Total heat loss
BTU/DD = 1893^6 (24) 6^059<7
6059.7 x 6016 (DD/yr.) = 36,455,263.5 Internal gain = 5,000,000
Net Thermal Efficiency = J343 ^ = 6.17
89% solar contribution
Concrete floor 24' long
2304 x 15 = 34,560 square feet
250 2/3 square feet = exposed concrete surface
34,560 square feet exposed mass x 0.2 (specific heat) BTU/#/F 6,912 sturage capacityBTU/F
6,912 x 30 = 207,360. BTU capacity
270 BTU/H/square feet insulation
270 x 10 x 250.67 = 676,809 BTU's Total Daily Capacity 31,455,263.5 (.11) = 3,460,079. BTU's storage needed 2,783,270 BTU storage needed to make 100% solar
South glazing area 143.5 square feet
Total square feet 1,015
Ceiling 1,000 x .013 X 75 = 975
Exposed floor 400 x .013 X 75 = 390
Outside wall 480 x .044 X 75 = 1,584
Windows 143.5 x .58 X 75 = 6,242.25
Atrium windows 70.5 x .58 X 15 = 613.35
Door 21 x .49 X 15 = 154.35
.018 x 3/4 (9000) x 75
x 6016 DD
38,583,999.8 6016 (1015)
89% solar contribution
SOLAR PROPERTIES OF WINDOW TREATMENTS
Insulation factor Side pull
Glare control Night privacy
Insulation Privacy Side pull
Glare control Privacy Side pull
Insulation Slant to consider Vertical Windows Doors
Living: Southern window
Insulation Side pull
Glare control Privacy
Atrium window: Privacy4'
Bedroom: (2) Insulation
Furnished with the units are all window treatments except the garden level and middle level greenhouse windows.
Specifications are as follows:
Windows call for:
Levolor Riviera Vertical Drape louvers Privacy/Atrium Windows
Levolor 1" slat blinds Insulation
Levolor Riviera Vertical Drape louvers in Cryotherm finishes with "definition" edging.
Insulated Roman Shades
Alexander, Christopher, et al., The Oregon Experiment, New York: Oxford University Press, 1975.
________, A Pattern Language, New York: Oxford University
Anderson, Bruce and Michael Riordan, The Solar Home Book,
Harrisville, NH: Brick House Publishing Co., 1976.
Balcomb, J. D., J. C. Hedstrom and R. D. McFarland, "Passive Solar Heating of Buildings," Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 1978.
Bass, B., "Greater Productivity and Satisfaction Through Self-Planning." Presented at the first International Sociological Conference of Participation and Self-Management, Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, 1972.
Bechtel, Robert B., Enclosing Behavior, Stroudsburg, PA: Bowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., 1977.
Becker, Franklin D., Design for Living: The Residents'
View of Multi-Family Housing, Report from Center for Urban Development Research, Cornell University, 1974.
Cooper, Claire, "The House as Symbol of Self," Designing for Human Behavior, Lang, Jon, et al., editors, Stroussburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., 1974 .
Coulthart, Hugh, "Buying Architecture: A Pedant's View,"
Canadian Forum, Vol. LVIII, No. 686, Feb. 79, p. 18.
Cunningham, Michael, "Notes on the Psychological Basis of Environmental Design," Environment and Behavior,
Vol. 9, No. 1, March 1977, p. 125.
Egan, M. David, Concepts of Thermal Control, 1976.
Franklin Research Center, The First Passive Solar Home Awards, U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Jan. 1979.
Goodrich, Ronald, "Surveys, Questionnaires, and Interviews," Designing for Human Behavior, Lang, Jon, et al., editors, Stroussburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson &
Ross, Inc., 1974, p. 234.
Hall, Edward, "Meeting Man's Basic Spatial Needs in
Artificial Environments," Lang, Jon, et al., (Ed). Designing for Human Behavior, Stroussburg, PA:
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., 1974.
Halprin, Lawrence, Taking Part: A Workshop Approach to
Collective Creativity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1974.
Haupert, David, "Passive Solar Housing: It Works!" Better Homes and Gardens, 57:37, Aug. 1979.
________, "Solar Idea House for the 1980's," Better Homes
and Gardens, 58:61, Jan. 1980.
Heimsath, Clovis, Behavioral Architecture, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1977.
Here Comes the Sun1981, Subcontract for the A. I. A.
Research Corporation for Solar Multifamily Housing by Joint Venture and Friends, Boulder, CO, 1975.
Honikman, Basil (Ed), Responding to Social Change, Stroussburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., 1975.
Ittelson, W., et al., An Introduction to Environmental Psychology, New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston,
Juhasz, Joseph, Lecture Series, Introduction to Societal Sciences and Environmental Design, University of Colorado at Boulder, Fall 1979.
Kuper, Leo, "Neighbor on the Hearth," Proshansky, Harold
et al. (Ed), Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical Settings, NYl Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970.
Lang, Jon, et al., Designing for Human Behavior, Stroussburg, PA: Dowden"^ Hutchinson & Ross, Inc 19 7 4 .
Langdon, William K., Movable Insulation, Emmaus, PA: Rodale Press, 1980.
Leckie, Jim, et al., Other Homes and Garbage, San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1975.
Mehrabian, Albert, Public Places and Private Spaces, NY: Basic Books, Inc., 1976.
Moore, Charles, et al., The Place of Houses, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1974.
Mullins, Patrick and J. H. Robb, "Residents' Assessment of a New Zealandard Public Housing Scheme," Environment and Behavior, 9:573, Dec. 1977.
Pawley, Martin, Architecture vs. Housing, NY: Praeger Publishers, 1971.
Proshansky, Harold, et al. (Ed), Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical Settings, NY~ Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970.
Rapoport, A. and R. E. Kantor, "Complexity and Ambiguity in Environmental Design," Journal of the AIP,
1967, 33, p. 210.
Saarinen, Thomas F., Environmental Planning: Perception and Behavior, Dallas: Houghton-Mifflin, 1976.
Sanoff, Henry, et al., Seeing the Environment, Raleigh, NC: Learning Environments, 1975.
Scott, Geoffrey, Architecture of Humanism: Study in the History of Taste. 2nd ed. Gloucester, Mass:
P. Smith, 1965.
Solar Dwelling Design Concepts, A. I. A. Research Corp.
U. S. Department of Housing and Development, Washington, DC: May 1976.
Sommer, Robert, Personal Space, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969.
Stromberg, R. P. and S. 0. Woodall, Passive Solar Buildings: A Compilation of Data and Results, Springfield, VA: N. T. I. S., 1977.
Tuan, Yi-Fu, Space and Place, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977.
Vroom, Victor Harold, Some Personality Determinants of the Effects of Participation, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1960.
Wagner, Walter F. (Ed), Energy-Efficient Buildings, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1980.
Wandersman, Abraham, "User Participation: A Study of Types of Participation, Effects, Mediators and Individual Differences," Environment and Behavior, 11:185, June 1979.
________, "User Participation in Planning Environments:
A Conceptual Framework," Environment and Behavior, 11:465, Dec. 1979.
Whitbread, Michael, "Two Trade-off Experiments to Evaluate the Quality of Residential Environments," Urban Studies, 15:149, June 1978.
Wright, David, Natural Solar Architecture: A Passive Primer. NY: Van Nostrant Reinhold Co., 1978.
Wright, Rodney, et al., The Hawkweed Passive Solar House Book, Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1980.