Green Development & Infill
The OTR Foundation is committed to making Over-the-Rhine the “greenest” historic neighborhood in America. A significant part of our mission to build a vibrant, sustainable neighborhood includes making OTR an environmentally conscious community. We began the first steps of this goal through the “OTR Green-Historic Study,” started in March 2008.
The goal of the study was to test a common assumption: that historic buildings are inherently energy inefficient. The study compiled a cross-disciplinary team of professionals to look at conflicts and commonalities between the goals of “green design” and historic preservation. The project was co-managed by the Over-the-Rhine Foundation and historic consultants Gray & Pape, Inc. It was funded, in part, by grants from the Ohio Historic Preservation Office and Duke Energy. It was also made possible by project partners dedicating significant amounts of their time without charge or at reduced rates.
The “Over-the-Rhine Green Historic Study” took over a year to complete. The full study report is available in both a printed and CD version by contacting Mike at info@otrfoundation.org. The report can also be downloaded here, but be advised that this is a very large file and takes a significant time to download. The study brought together an unprecedented cross-disciplinary team, including: LEED certified architects, historic preservation consultants, developers, building code experts, solar and geothermal experts, and a structural engineer. It also utilized a University of Cincinnati DAAP course and a graduate level design seminar.
Using four prototypical buildings in Over-the-Rhine, the study asked, is it possible to redevelop these properties: 1) in an historically appropriate manner, 2) to be “green,” and 3) do so within a budget that would make them sellable in the Over-the-Rhine housing market? The study used the Secretary of Interior Standards for Historic Rehabilitation (SOI standards) as the benchmark for “historically appropriate.” (SOI standards are the standards that must be met to obtain federal or state historic tax credits.) And it used the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) point system created by the US Green Building Council as the test for being “green.” The project properties were not actually developed as part of the study, but were put through architectural design work, historic analysis, LEED analysis, and energy modeling.
The study’s findings have surprised even study participants. Key findings include: 1) All four project properties would be capable of obtaining LEED certification, including reaching Energy Star levels of energy efficiency; 2) LEED certification could be obtained in all four project properties while still complying with the SOI standards for historic rehabilitation; and 3) Both goals could be obtained without significant additional expense.
In many ways, green and historic are a natural match. While people often think of “old” buildings as drafty and inefficient, the truth is that we are just recently starting to exceed the same levels of energy efficiency that is available in buildings constructed prior to the 1920’s. Although we associate large windows and high ceilings with energy inefficiency, these features were designed to keep buildings cool in summer months without air conditioning, and they provide a source of natural light and solar heat.
Environmentalists are also starting to look more seriously at “embodied energy,” or the amount of fuels and materials that it would take to re-build an existing structure with the same level of energy efficiency. Life-cycle is another aspect of environmentalism that is often overlooked. The ecological impact of a building is more than how much electric and gas it uses. It includes the impact of the materials used to create it (e.g. chemical-soaked lumber, tar shingles, petroleum based plastics, manufacturing processes with toxic byproducts, hardwood floors and wood studs that increase deforestation, etc.) as well as the impact of getting those materials to the job site (e.g. the amount of oil and diesel fuel burned and the amount of toxins released into the atmosphere to get the products from their base elements through the manufacturing process, then delivered to a retailer and the job site.) “Green materials” are designed to decrease these negative ecological consequences, but the most effective way of decreasing them is by recycling entire buildings through historic rehabilitation.
Demolition is bad for both historic preservation and the environment. Energy is used to tear things down. Destroying old buildings often releases toxins like lead, asbestos, and silica into the surrounding air, soil, and water. Then the debris is hauled off (using diesel and emitting CO2) to take up space in a landfill. For all of these reasons, the buildings with the most potential to be “green” are typically existing, historic properties.
This is particularly true in Over-the-Rhine. The neighborhood was one of the most densely built in the US. Full of mixed-use buildings and home to the city’s first Urban-Mix zoning district, OTR has the infrastructure to be walkable and self-contained. Its density also represents very efficient land use. And although the un-insulated walls and large old windows represent challenges to energy efficiency, OTR buildings often have light shafts, prismatic glass, good air circulation, and other historic features that we now consider “green.” OTR was also built to last, housing multi generations who have recycled its buildings; and most of it was constructed with local, natural materials.
We have learned that the largest challenge to green-historic redevelopment is an information gap between environmentalists and historic preservationists, and yet another between both environmentalists and preservationists and the contractors that do the renovation or reconstruction. Simply by conducting this study and sharing its outcomes, we hope that we will make green-historic redevelopment easier and more prevalent. As part of the study, we also developed a checklist to help make the process of green-historic redevelopment easier. (It can be downloaded here.)
OTR has roughly 500 vacant buildings and hundreds more in need of extensive redevelopment. This provides an incredible opportunity. We need to rebuild OTR. As a neighborhood, a city, a nation, and a global community, we also need to “go green,” so why not set the goal of making Over-the-Rhine America’s greenest historic neighborhood? We have the opportunity to utilize OTR to make Cincinnati a national leader in molding the nation’s perception of environmental development. There is no reason not to do so, and failing to do so would be an incredible opportunity squandered. As a result of participating in the “OTR Green-Historic Study,” Urban Sites has already changed plans and redeveloped the Belmain building on Main Street to become LEED certification; and the OTR Foundation will we working hard to ensure that development throughout the neighborhood will follow this lead.
In addition to grant sources, the study required a great deal of commitment from its participants. The University of Cincinnati contributed a design class and a graduate student seminar conducted by professors Virginia Russell and Jeff Tilman; and all of the project participants dedicated generous amounts of time and professional expertise.
Some project participants include:
Gray & Pape, historic consultants: www.graypape.com
Chad Edwards/ Emersion Design, AIA, LEED-AP architects: www.emersiondesign.com
Sanyog Rathod/ SOL Developments, AIA, LEED-AP architects: www.soldevelopments.org
Steve Hampton/ Hampton Architects, AIA, LEED-AP architects: www.hamptonarchitects.com
Ken Jones/ Jones & Assoc. Architects, full-service firm with decades of historic redevelopment experience: kjaarch@isoc.net, (513) 241-2022
Cincinnati Preservation Association: www.cincinnatipreservation.org
Jacob Bros. Heating and Cooling: www.jacobbros.com
Urban Sites Properties (Ask about green, stunning, and reasonably priced condos in the Belmain Building): www.urbansitesproperties.com