HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket 03-17-09^
Hotel Indigo
Carmel, IN
Carmel Plan Commission Information Packet
for March 17, 2009 Meeting
The following information is included in each packet:
Tab 1 Summary of Gesign Changes and Other Materials Considered,
with Pros and Cons
Tab 2 Updated Exterior Elevations with updated Exterior Material
Percentages
Tab 3 Hygrothermal Performance Summary of Exterior Wall Systems
from the Department of Energy
Tab 4 EIFS vs. Stucco Summary and Power Point Presentation
Tab 5 Mural Photos and Lighting Specs Sheets
Tab 6 Color Renderings and Color Elevations
Contact Information:
Jovon Rayl
Dimensions, Inc.
110 E. Alto Road
Kokomo, Indiana 46901
765-453-2244, Ext. 102
765-453-2470 fax
www.dimensions-architects.com
n
~c~~s'
~~;
!,.~~
~`---
^
^
^ Hotel Indigo
^ Carmel, IN
^ March 17, 2009
~
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
^ OTHER MATERIALS CONSIDERED, WITH PROS AND CONS
^
^ SUMMARY OF CHANGES
^ Front Entry Vestibule has been changed from EIFS to Limestone /Brick. See the
attached partial entry vestibule elevation.
^ Top band of EIFS has been reduced in height by 12". This could be reduced
further to bring the total to 10% or less. See the attached exterior elevation.
^ Center vertical counterpoint element on entry and side fagades and the center
vertical counterpoint element on the far~ade facing Highway 31 has been
^ changed from EIFS to a buff colored brick. See the attached exterior elevation.
^
OTHER MATERIALS CONSIDERED, WITH PROS AND CONS
^
^ In the earlier design, the EIFS was used as a trim element, at the recessed balconies
and at various top band conditions as well as vertical counterpoint elements to the brick,
^ contrasting in texture, scale, color, depth and placement. These elements comprised
about 12% of the overall, exterior envelope material square footage.
~
Our current design uses EIFS as a trim at various top band conditions and balconies.
^ These elements compose 10% or less of the overall envelope. The other areas such as
vertical counterpoints elements were changed to a buff color brick to try to match the
^ EIFS color.
^
Pre-Cast Concrete Panels
. As a building material, pre-cast concrete panels sit at the higher end of a material cost
range. The cost of transporting the panels, usually from a plant out of state, and the
. need to sheath /finish the panels on both the exterior and interior contribute to their high
cost. They can become a viable option for a project when the design can incorporate the
. following:
Large percentage of the exterior envelope done as pre-cast panels
~ They are utilized as structural components
There is a repetition of design elements
^
The use of the panels above the 5~h Floor, to replace the top EIFS band would add a
^ considerable amount of weight to the top of the building, having a major impact on the
structural cost to carry /transfer that weight down. to the ground. The use of pre-cast
^ panels at the balcony conditions would again add weight and cost to the concrete
^
^
^
^
^
~ planks. In addition, the smaller size of the elements at the balconies does not lend
themselves to efficient pre-cast fabrication.
Using pre-cast concrete panels as an alternative material to replace the EIFS that is not
~ used as trim elements does not meet any of the efficiency noted above criteria, and
hence, would not, in our opinion, be a viable alternate from a structural or design
~ perspective, nor from a material or installation cost comparison.
~ Brick vs. EIFS
Brick is a more viable option since a majority of the building already is comprised of a
~ brick /stone veneer. In order to reduce the total amount of EIFS used, the three changes
listed above have been made, two of which involved changing EIFS to brick. For the
~ vertical counterpoint elements, while not as strong a design strategy as using the EIFS,
the color contrast of a buff colored accent brick to the field brick could still be utilized.
While replacing the EIFS with a buff colored brick would not be as costly as using pre-
cast concrete panels, these changes from EIFS to brick would still add cost to the
project, as brick is more expensive for both the material and installation relative to EIFS.
~ In addition, structural lintels would be needed over all of the openings, as well as the buff
^ brick simply being a more expensive product than the field brick. Also, a 3 page report
on the Hygrothermal performance of Exterior Wall Systems expands on the benefits of
^ EIFS vs. Brick.
~ Pre-Cast Stone Veneer vs. EIFS
~ This material would be very similar to brick features mentioned above with regard to
. cost, design strategy and color /contrast.
~ Stucco vs. EIFS
In our last SSC meeting, we brought them performance information regarding EIFS, as
~ well as comparisons of the two materials. We took these measures because it is the
opinion of all parties involved in the construction side of the equation that EIFS will
~ provide superior long-term water management and thermal performance relative to
stucco, while requiring less future maintenance, and still being a less expensive material
~ both for purchase and for installation. This packet contains some of that additional
. information comparing stucco to EIFS.
. Rob Little, Little Construction, related their experience relative to the performance of
both products in our Indiana climate. Mr. Little will be available at the Carmel Plan
^ Commission meeting to answer any questions, as his company would be the installer,
whether the choice would be stucco or EIFS. We have provided a presentation that
~ reviews the important performance components of EIFS and compares EIFS to Stucco.
(See tab 4)
^
^
^
_^
^
^
HOTEL INDIGO, CARMEL, IN.
EXTERIOR MATERIAL PERCENTAGES
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE : 43,000 S.F.
MATERIAL AREA IN SQUARE FEET PERCENT OF OVERALL FACADE
EIFS
MEETING ROOM, TOP BAND
TRIM AND BALCONIES 4,300 S.F. 10%
ART MURAL 1,893 S.F. 4.4%
STONE /BRICK 26,316 S.F. 61.2%
DOORS & WINDOWS 10,491 S.F. 24.4%
TOTAL 43,000 S.F. 100.0%
K:\H
(
m ~y
I I--
zll
~~
III
~"
i
"~ ~ ~
I~
rnl~
III
II
m
CII
D~
I~
III
-II
O'
II
z r--; --
~I
II
II
II
~~~
ii
ii
II
ii
ii
I I
\~ \~ A
~
~~ ---
\~ \~ \~
\~ \\ \~
n
,, ,,
,;
;; ~~ ;, ~~
% % ~ %
/ /
%
/
/%
%
/
~~ ~~
I
,, I
I
~~ i ~~
i
,, I
I
T\
,~
i
,,
~~ i ~~
I
------- --------- --~ I
L
^
^
^
i
^
i
^
^
^
. a
O
^ ~
m
O~
^ O
N
N
8
3
a
0
. O
3
0
0
^ u
3
^_
^
I
^~
^ ~~
0
^~
~I
^I
^~
N
Z
_T
n
O
Y
^
Q Q ~ Q Q Q ~
~ Q ;' Q Q Q
~
1 i I li i i i i i i i
i I I I i i li i i II i
f
- lgyM lrh~jY ~l'~=`F
V
Y+
T
~
r;'-'T.~
4yi~ N ~.i~
.
'
.
$~i-!h lrtri 7±y~~.i+i .yl ' %r~3r ~ <.r• «S+
f <~ '.
~Y` IV<~~W
1"rvY l
-
~A
~
~
'y
ti ~y'~i^jshs. ~ "'~•~\ ~t~~~~n"
q~ 'YG~ .
'
~
~<T -
<
'
TC~rS _
W~
'~ ~r~a ~r cry ~
x*4
TiN Y.
T
1
~ik
S _. . .
.
.
... V
/n
i a
v OF0.Met A
*oa
r r r
r i
r n v ~ y r r r r ~~ '. .,
.~
~ ~ v ~. a v . w i
v
- ~ ~SSt?
t r
r r ,
i r r ~ r w r i r .. ~ .. r .' `.
•
~ -.
~
••. ~
~. ~• ~ ~ ~ v a w • v r r
r r
~
six SHEY~TM RIXNi
~
~
_..
~®
_
~
~~ ~ ~ sc _~ ~_ - x~sNEO ~m R0.YA
V 1S.51R ' :i '. W' ' .'-'.. „ '~: . - 'O. ~:~
.. ~ .
. . . .
e ~ -- ~ ~ ++.mF Fxrsr<o ~o ao~ A
YxiT/t . ~ .,o-
...
p
. .
_.
„~„ ~~F
.--- -e
. ,.
F ~~~EO ~o ate, ,.
~ „s,2
I 4
_,......,.--, p ,. _
- _ ~ _ _ _ .~.__ _._ _ i - - _r _ _ _.~
I ~ x oa+,~
~risr~
•-~------------ ---- -- -- ----- -- ~' m~
- - ~ -- --
-' - ~ -- • -
- - - -
- - -
-- -- .
- -
ENTRY ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION o~~~~ o~~~~ .~~ ~~,~~ o.~~~s,E~~E~E~o ; ~,a ~o~,~a a ..,~., o~ E,.
- _.__ -gam
~-
o---
o--
8
o---
o---
o--
o---
o---
~~
a---
o--
z
~_
Q
W
J
W
~--
O
z
^
^ OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORI'
^ MANAGED BY UT-R ATi ELLE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Achilles Karagiozis, Ph.D.
^ Building Envelope Group
P.O. Box 2006
Oak Ritlge, TN 37831.6070
^ Telephone: (86515763924; Faz: (6651574.9354
Email: karagiozisan(dornl.gov
www.ornl,govlb[clmoisture
^
^
^
^ The Hygrothermal Performance of Exterior Wall Systems: Key Points of the Oak
^ Ridge National Laboratory NET Facilities Research Project
^
January t, 2005 through March 30, 2006
^
^ Background: The US Department of Energy (DOE), through the Office of Energy Efficiency
^ and Renewable Energy's Building Technologies Program, and the EIFS Industry Members
Association (EIMA) jointly funded a 3 year (15 months completed) field research project
^ conducted by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) on moisture intrusion, drying potential
and energy performance of various configurations of exterior cladding systems (EIFS, brick,
^ stucco, concrete block and cementitious fiber board siding). In addition, the impact of
innovative EIFS features, specifically liquid applied moisture control membranes, smart vapor
^ retarder systems, and exterior cladding venting, on the performance of EIFS was evaluated.
The research to investigate the side-by-side hygric performances of each wall cladding system,
^ the field data and the hygrothermal model derived from it are particularly useful not only in
developing guidelines for the use of EIFS but also in demonstrating the superior moisture and
^ temperature control performance of EIFS as compared with other types of exterior claddings.
The study is continuing into a second year of field-testing, incorporating additional
^ configurations and wall cladding parameters, such as purposefully induced defects.
^ Study Goals: The primary goals of the study are:
• To validate the moisture and thermal performance of EIFS wall systems
^
^ To quantify the performance of EIFS over other types of exterior claddings
^ To develop and calibrate a hygrothermal (moisture and temperature) computer model
with the unique features of EIFS that will validate the computer model for all climatic
^ regions
^ Study Location: Charleston, SC and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
^ Study Approach: In keeping with the DOE's strategy of promoting awhole-building approach
to building design, operation and maintenance, the research project considered the building
^ envelope in its entirety, rather than studying isolated materials or component systems. The
research approach is summarized below:
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
. Characterize the moisture, and thermal performance properties of critical construction
materials and sub-systems used in exterior wall systems
• Confirm the predictions of computer model by comparing them to actual field results
• Conduct field testing on a variety of exterior wall systems to determine their thermal, air
leakage and moisture control performance in real world, average environmental
conditions, including some severe-environmental conditions, during the course of one
~ year
• Employ hygrothermal modeling to simulate field tested exterior wall systems to
. determine how to improve critical cladding system elements, with the goal of optimizing
their performance
• Develop design methodology that will permit architects and engineers to optimize energy
efficiency while controlling air and moisture transport to prevent material deterioration
and potential fungal contamination of the indoor environment
Facility Design. To achieve these goals, a special building was designed and constructed near
Charleston, South Carolina. The 15 exterior cladding configurations to be evaluated were
integrated into one side of the building (southern exposure). In this way, all of the exterior
claddings would be exposed to similar weather conditions during the course of the study.
Building orientation and placement of the exterior wall test panels were determined after
considerable study of historical weather patterns, including the prevailing direction of
precipitation.
Exterior Cladding Panel Configurations. While other types of exterior claddings were
studied, the primary focus of this project was various EIFS configurations, including EIFS with
drainage systems.
Sensor Placement and Data Collection. Each of the wall panels contained a variety of
sensors that recorded a full, constant profile of temperature, heat flux, relative humidity, and
moisture content. These sensors collected data 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and transmitted
the data to the ORNL Building Thermal Envelope Systems & Materials Energy Division
Research facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee for analysis. Data upon which the conclusions were
~ derived were collected during a period of 15 months, January 1, 2005 through March 30, 2006,
and included average monthly weather observations and both interior and exterior sensor
readings.
Results and Conclusions. The research data lead to the following findings and support the
following statements:
• The best performing wall system was the EIFS wall consisting of four inches of
^ expanded polystyrene insulation board without any interior stud insulation (no
fiberglass). This wall outperformed all other walls in terms of moisture while maintaining
^ superior thermal performance.
EIMA Research Project Page 2 of $ pgk fllOpB Nellaml tg60.8Ip•y
UT-BATTELLE
^
^
^
• The brick clad wall systems tended to accumulate more moisture and retain moisture
longer than EIFS cladding.
~ The cementitious fiberboard siding wall systems tended to accumulate more moisture
. and retain moisture longer than the EIFS cladding.
~ The wall panels with polyethylene vapor retarders have higher wood moisture content
and excessive sheathing relative humidity (80 percent and higher). The results from this
study clearly indicate that the use of a polyethylene vapor retarder is not a good
strategy. Instead, interior vapor retarders that are highly vapor permeable and do not
provide a resistance to moisture drying are recommended in hot and humid climates.
• EIFS walls may employ house wraps as exterior water-resistive barriers; however,
^ moisture movement and accumulation is higher in these wall systems when compared
with water-resistive barrier coatings used as water-resistive barriers. EIFS with water-
. resistive barrier coatings, used as water resistive barriers, performed significantly better
than other claddings that used building paper. Wall. panels with water-resistive barrier
^ coatings outperformed spun-bonded polyolefin membranes.
• EIFS using grooved expanded polystyrene insulation board improves the performance of
the wall, since venting is enhanced.
^ Insulation is more beneficial when placed towards the exterior.
• EIFS drainage assemblies, using vertical ribbons of adhesives, provide a drainage path
and air space that contributes positively towards the hygrothermal performance of the
walls.
• EIFS installed over glass mat faced, modified gypsum core sheathing that is attached to
steel studs performs slightly better for interior vapor control strategies that are open
(higher water vapor permeance) as compared with EIFS attached aver wood sheathing
and wood studs.
The wall system demonstrating the worst hygric performance was the brick, followed by the
~ stucco clad systems (both 3-coat and 1-coat), and then the cementitious fiberboard cladding.
Please note that the brick used in this research project is not particularly liquid absorptive. It will
be informative to observed gap between the performance of brick and EIFS in subsequent
studies if brick that is more representative of typical products is used.
Additional Findings, Conclusions, and Insights. Evaluation of the first year's results is
~ continuing, as is the collection of the data, which is going into its second year. The first-year
results along with the results from the second year undoubtedly will yield additional findings,
~ conclusions, and insights. Interested persons are encouraged to check back with EIMA for
updates.
EIMA Research Project Page 3 Of 3 0>gI ~ lte~l lehmatm~y
UT-BATTELLE
i ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ • ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 ^ • ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
.,n
~ a .
~nSII CUIC~
Portland Cement Plaster /Stucco
versus EIFS ®ver firar~e constructi®n
Sto Building with conscience.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Portland Cement Plaster /Stucco
over frame construction
raditional W
ther P
sto rh n
^
~~' "'
r
.r
.
5 :u t I.',;=~' *„a Erse
Inslitut
tection
1. Sheathing (Dens Glass Gold, plywood,
etc. )
2. Water-Resistive Barrier (some local code
bodies require 2 layers of secondary
moisture protection, for ex. 2 layers of 15#
felt)
3. 2.5 # Metal Lath
4. Plaster /Stucco (7/8" thickness as per
ASTM C 897)
5. Primer /Sealer
6. Trowel applied finish coat or Paint
Sto Building with conscience.
J; + f Sx k xr E
Stucco used over insulation? ~°~~~~°~~
• the use of stucco over
foam is possible but in
some parts of the
country, it becomes
difficult to detail, difficult
to install and more costly
Sto Building with conscience.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
j
k x~~
Barrier EIFS vs. E I ~S with ~°~~~~°~
®rainage over framing /sheathing
Standard "Barrier" type EIFS
- Has been around for approx. 45
years
- Barrier EIFS is designed to stop bulk
water entry at the outer surface of the
wall. EIFS prevents water from
penetrating at the exterior surface.
Flashing (source drainage) is
incorporated at all changes of
construction and penetrations to
direct water to the exterior.
Sto Building with conscience. ~arri~r EIFS
Barri E I F
S ~ ~~~~° ~~~`~'~ ~ ~~~~
er vs. EIFS with ~~~_~~~~~~
Drainage over framing /sheathing
• "Drainable" type EIFS
- Has been around for approx. 10
years
- EIFS with drainage is designed as
with a barrier EIFS with the
addition of awater-resistive
barrier on the surface of the
substrate. Incidental water, should
it penetrate a breach (crack or
mechanical damage) in the EIFS,
drains between vertical ribbons of
adhesive to a lower flashing and
out of the cladding assembly.
Sto 'Building with conscience.
EIFS with @rainage
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
StoTherm NExT
Drainable type EIFS with Fluid-applied
Waterproofing Air / Mois-cure Barrier
EIFS with Drainage incorporating
StoGuard, aFluid-applied
Waterproofing Air & Moisture Barrier
Vertical ribbons of adhesive is ' ~-
required
Lap fluid-applied membrane over
back flange of starter track or flashingf
to direct any incidental moisture ~ tt`
~:
outbound of the cladding -note that ~ '""
~F.x
this lapping becomes seamless when ~~
~:.~:
applied versus that of paper products - _
q~,i~' s ~ S~.r ~ rt ~i.
Y
h
~
Inslitut
Sto :Building with conscience.
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
}.
~~;,_
~,,, n f
~£s
F z
5I ~ ~
}mi.:,~T
qic,
t~ *^ d
/„ J
® -
~~
O
O ~
o
O ~
U C~
U
U ~,
~ ~
N
~ j
~ ~
_Q Q
V
O
~v/A/.T~
_ I >
l~^
i
O
~~
•O
O ~1
O ~ yO
V ~ r
;~ V ,0\
N ~ v
W
O
O
/L~
V
V
~+
a
W
W
~.~
^~
W
U
O
U
~~
.~
~'/r
V
.M~
W
O
I'd
N
Stucco Bldg Expansion Joint ~'p t ;,~~
~4 £~
+
~a_
vs. EIFS Bldg Expansion J oint '°~"`°`~`
v~.
Two Piece Expansion
Joint Accessory (or
back-to back casing
beads) at building
expansion joints
5to t~ui~aing with conscience.
EIFS terminates on both
sides of the bldg expansion
joint with proper back-
wrapping, note that no
accessories are used as is
the case with stucco
Y~
f;k S' a zak gat ~'F"s ,1
.,
kai r. fit:.':.
l nsti[ui
E I FS versus Stucco
• Limited amount of joints • Expansion joints required every
required -less chance of 144sf over frame construction
moisture intrusion • Cracking is common and extra
• Limited or no cracking precautions are required to limit
cracking
• Reduced weight of structure - Metal lath corrosion potential
L/240 deflection criteria L/360 deflection criteria
® Greater design flexibility Foam shapes can be added over
• Greater "impact" resistance stucco brown coat
• Seamless application over Greater "puncture" resistance
fluid-applied membrane • Multiple punctures through
• Cost effective secondary moisture barrier
• High insulation value resulting Increased costs as building height
in energy savings! -True increases and as design becomes
Green Building & Sustainable more complex
Design benefits Low R-Value
Sto Building with conscience.
d s m kt
Concerns with usin EIFS ~~-~ ~=~~:a_d
• Some building owners perceive EIFS as an
inferior cladding system or only think of EIFS as
the older "Barrier" EIFS
® So what has changed?
Sto _ Building with conscience.
1 ^sl ituf
Simply put, EIFS are better toda
y
• Architects are paying more attention to detail
• Knowing problem areas
• Integration of details to either prevent bulk water
intrusion or allow water to egress the system
® Integration of a secondary drainage system that
function as an air and water barrier (StoGuard)
• Improved exterior sheathing boards (i.e. GP ®ens
Glass Gold)
• More experience, almost 40 years now in the U.S.
Sto Building with conscience.
What else?
~~' #~ b* S 4. ~
6 ~ 5
~,, 1:.1~ Al` v Fv,~... ... _..,..
~flSll llllC~
• EIFS has been the most scrutinized wall cladding for years and therefore,
the most tested cladding
- ICC now accepts EIFS into international commercial & residential
building codes
- Development of Hurricane Impacfi Resistant Systems and approved by
Miami / Dade County, FL, one of the strictest code bodies in the U.S.
- ORNL Study -testing sponsored by EIMA and the U.S. Dept. of
Energy (DOE), through the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy's (EERE) Building Technologies Program (approx. $1 mil
research study)
Sto Building with conscience.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
~~
,~`'i~h' ~;'~ ~ ~„
Exterior Wall Ciaddin sta M
g ~~
Performance Stud ~ ''~~~"""
y
~ EXTERIOR WALL CLADDING
PERFORMANCE STDDY
Paelce o5key miIIJS, ~• y_rteimmc?
govli Yc[ WIFt9Y ef!idaooY. 5tn~.~.~~a4~ie
oequol uns' mel~zsa co~itr~xl'u ,I=tia.
u~uuJ, hat hnmd 2nrx ~ c~i: antes
E[~S WDUST1iF m„r,x.ams.,.. -.
tdl:!d6EHS ~n~.,.m; we ~Un,,..mnae ~,'._~ v .+,u.,,M a,r ~_ro
assoaanau
Sto 'Building with consciencE
F d~ ~ at .t~'
y g y ,,,5~,<<~~
Ke F i n d i n s b ®RN L .~ b 3~}~~~~ ~~}
• EIFS with 4-inches of foam outside the stud cavity, a liquid applied
water-resistive barrier coating & no insulation in the stud cavity was
the BEST performing wall configuration
• EIFS absorb little moisture & maintain a consistent, acceptable
moisture level within the cladding despite varying outdoor conditions
® EIFS with drainage ~ a liquid applied water -resistive barrier
coating, such as StoTherm NExT readily disperse liquid water &
moisture introduced by flaws in the building envelope
• Liquid applied water-resistive barrier coatings outperform sheet
goods. In addition, EIFS with water-resistive barrier coatings
performed significantly better than other claddings that used building
paper orspun-bonded polyolefin membranes.
Sto Building with conscience.
g r ~,~~,
i 6 i x _sbo...- a
What some of the Buildin ~ ° t~ ~ ~ --~
~nstrtu[~i"~
Science Experts are sa in
Y g
• Limit the glazing area to approx. 30% -and use
really good glass & frames
• Don't over-ventilate
• Use Air Barriers to ensure air tightness and to
reduce energy costs
• Don't insulate steel stud cavities, use continuous
exterior insulation on the outside of the substrate
• Drainable EIFS are among the most robust and
advanced mois ture con tro l assemblies available
Sto .Building with conscience.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ A ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^
{,. r
Air Barriers ~ Ener FA; kv~~`~~#~??
Efficiency
Consequences of uncontrolled air leakage:
- The U.S. Department of Energy has estimated that
40% of energy used for heating and cooling is due
to air infiltration/exfiltration.
- Premature building deterioration due to moisture
transport by air that can corrode anchor systems,
steel studs and reduce the performance of other
envelop materials.
Sto ,Building with conscience.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^~^^^^^^^~^r
StoGuard Fluid-applied _..
Waterproofing Air / IVloisture Barrier
-Used to:
-Increase building energy efficiency
-Waterproof various substrates
-Stop air infiltration and exfiltration
-Prevent moisture forming in wall cavity
-Create drainage plane under various
wall claddings, including EIFS
-Eliminate mold growth
Sto Building with conscience.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i ^ ^
{'~h ~~ cti ~
lns~ita[c~
Example of project with
StoGuard applied prior to the
EIFS. Other than the
openings, the exterior
sheathing is waterproof
Sto Building with conscience.
,mother examp~e showing StoGuard being
® ~ ~' ~
installed as the exterior sheathing goes up the ~ ,~~~K ~~~---~ ~ ~<<~
wall. This was required by the owner to help `115`"U"~
protect his bldg during the approaching rainy &
hurricane season in Florida
5to ;Building with conscience.
!.atw
^ tea
ut
~k ~
rt £:
.::
F : } yJ
'+'J
^
^
^ ~ U) ~
^ ~ LL ClS
' ' W ~
~ O ~ ~
^ ~ ~ ~
^ `*~ p cn
U
^ ~ O ~
^ ~ Q~
^ ~ ~ ~
~ O ~ ~
^ ~ ~
.~~~
' ' ~~ o
~v ~~
^ ~ ~ _~
^ ~ ~ ~~
^
^
^
v
V
C
O
.~
.~
m
0
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
~;
t
~~.~~,:
~. ~;
~;
~~,
9`a
i.t..ft~
~6 J
l/,~^l
I
s
® /
e
W
V
.~
O
.~
`r^W
.l.
/~^j
v /
v
V
C
v
C
O
V
+-+
.~
C
.~
CD
i~
^ Y ~ ~
,`t,,.
,'~ n
S~r:L ~?
~P~ '~
.~~
k
+iz
iaa.d:
^ !'/~
~ ~ '
^
^
^
^
^ -~ ~ U
^ U ~ ~
~ O
^ O
^ ~ ~ ~ (n
^ ~~~,~.
._ w
• > ~ ~ ~
^ ~°~~a~
~~
^ o ~S ~ o
~ ~ ~~ ~
^ a~
~~~_~
^ ~' ~ ~' ~
c
^ N U O
^ cn N v N
N
^ _~ ~ ~ ~
^ ~ ~ ~ o
^ ~~ ~_~
^ O ~O
^ O ~ N
Q ~
^ (Cf ~ ~
N
^ W N
^
a~
v
v
0
V
+-~
.~
c
.~
m
0
+~
^
^
~ ~ ~ ~ ®~~ ~
^ '~/'
~ ISSUE # 1021
~ EIFS VS TRADITIONAL STUCCO
~ EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems) area non-bearing exterior wall
~ cladding made from a layer of rigid foam insulation board covered with a reinforced
surface lamina. Traditional hard coat stucco is anon-bearing exterior wall cladding
^ typically made from a Portland cement based material that is applied in layers over a
metal reinforcement such as galvanized lath or galvanized stucco netting.
^ EIFS Hard Coat Stucco
^ Attachment EIFS can be attached using an adhesive, Hard Coat Stucco uses mechanical attach-
mechanical fasteners or both. ment through the metal reinforcement over
most substrates. If the substrate is clean,
bare masonry the hard coat stucco can be
applied directly without the use of metal
reinforcement or fasteners.
Insulation EIFS can provide a minimum of R3 up Hard Coat stucco will provide up to a
to a maximum of R20. maximum of R1.
. Color EIFS is available in any color with a high Hard Coat stucco is available in limited
Availability degree of uniformity and reproducibility. colors and is subject to color variability due
^ and to the varying effect of cement hydration on
Uniformity color development.
Textures EIFS is available in more than six diff- Hard Coat stucco is available in a limited
Brent textures plus freestyle textures. variety of sand and freestyle textures and
fully dependent upon by the skill technique
of the applicator.
Joints EIFS (PB) requires sealantjoints around Hard Coat stucco requires sealant joints
penetrations, at changes in substrate around penetrations, at changes in substrate
and at floor lines in wood frame const- and at floor lines in wood frame construction,
ruction. and control joints every 144 square feet, at
natural stress points, and any panel areas
where length to width exceeds a ratio of
2.5:1.
Cracking EIFS is highly crack resistant and resi- Hard Coat stucco is typically brittle and can
lient and is accommodate building crack if not properly jointed or cured.
movement.
~
The TOTAL WALL Technical Department
F~ ~~ '~
~~. ~, ~
~~
~..~
~:r _
~~~
I~'~
^
^
^
C~1~D~3C ~
M~:lcuilyBrwds Carwarry
4750 SERIES
^ KNUCKLE MQUNT
^ T5-T5H0 LINEAR FLUORESCENT
DESCRIPTION:
The Hytlre14750 Series of Linear Fluorescent Lightingfsxtures bring
the high performance of the T5 & TS HO lamp to the outdoors. With
the 4750 Series patens pending Polar PackTM cold weather option,
full light output is now a reality to O° F (-78°CI. The T5 & T5 HO lamp
performance, the high output symmetrical and asymmetrical
distributions, andthe simple lines make the 4750 Series fixture ideal
farspreading soft, even illumination along walls, signs, and planters.
The 4750Series Linear Fluoresc entT5 offers single and multiple lamp
configurations. Five unique lighting distributions with a variety of
lamp wattages and sizes.
SPECIFICATIONS:
MATERIAL: Extruded 6063-T4aluminumwithdiecastA360alumi-
num end caps. All fasteners are stainless steel.
LAMP: Fluorescent, single or multiple T5 & T5 HO to 54 Watt per
lamplmaximuml. Lamp included unless IJLP is specs/ied.
SOCKET: G5 Miniature Bi-Pin.
VOLTAGE: Multi-Vo1t1120V-277V50/60Hz1.
DISTRIBUTIONS: WWD -Wall Wash
NFL -Narrow Flood
MFL -Medium Flood
VFL -Vertical Flood
WFL -Wide Flood
LENS: Curved high strength optical grade clear acrylic
MOUNTING: IKMI Knuckle Mounted with two 1211/2"NPT side
mounting arms.
ACCESSORIES: External glare control available.
OPTIONS: Tamper-proof hardware and Polar PackT'^ cold
weather options availahle.
BALLAST: Integral Electronic multi-volt, 0°FI-18°CI minimum
starting temperature.
FINISH: See ordering guide far color options.
LISTING: U.L., CSA
/"d~"~ Hytlrel is an ISO 9001
'1;;~ Certified Manufacturer
®2006 Hydrel
Revised 17/1/06
4750_KM
TYPE JOB NAME
PART NUMBER
Model Lamp Type Voltage Distribution Mounting Mountiny Options
Accessories Options Lamv Finish Listing
~~
_- ~~
;
._..
_
1
_--' " r`;
/~~ -.,..
'~~,~.~
rt.
1
,
rl I
.
41 - B2 5/1s°
4](16" ~ f591
1113) ~
4
(1021
i/ ~ 3..
~~ l~ac 1(]fi)
~ 41~
-
b'.- 1/2" NPT S[em
X
4]50 SERIES LINEAR FLUORESCENT
4752 % i ~
28"
I
,~
I (]11)
4]53 G ./
40° _
I~-11016~i
4754 /- -
U
~1 2t95~
4]56 / ./
tll
74.5"
h---
892
(1
)
~
it
"
97.5
12477)
NOTE: HYOAEL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MODIFY SPECIFICATION WITHOUT NOTICE.
Any dimension on this sheet ism be assumed as a reference dimension:"Used for
information purposes only. I[ does not govern manufacturing or inspection
requiremenis'~IANSI Y14.5-19731
APPROVALS
72881 9ratlley Ave
Sylmar, CA 91342
Phone: 818-3829465
Fax: 818-362-6548
www.hydrel.com
1
~'
~~
by ~.. ..~~ ,.r 0.:z.si_w®r
-.-
~3
r
1
•
®.
J.
i y.S~.
ar^^^^^r~rr^^^^^^^^^^^^^r^^^^~s^
Southeast Elevation
Northeast Elevation
Northwest Elevation
Southwest Elevation
L~
§ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I
~
R 1t R R ~ 4 ~ ~ x r Y g e ~ ~ -: ~ ~ w C~ ~ °' ~ ~
$
R (
f
D o m . r . ® 0 0 0§ m o o
R ~ R R ~ F $ R ! F ~ ~
r cn
i
CDG
CONSULTING INC.
m~~s r'~ru°~"~ars
r°at10ia'iGan~ rer ~
~°~ ~
$'~' Y A
- B LAND-
~,
- SCAPE
m
~
0
D
r'
` PLAN m m
HOTEL INDIGO
CLAY TWP
HAMILTON COUNTY, IN
developed by~
DYKSTR~1 BUILbING
8465 KEYSTONE CROSSING
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46240
,,,
TRACT 1
CLAY TOWNSHIP
HAMILTON COUNTY, INDIANA
SEC-26, T-18-N, R-3-E
GEM
5iURN SEVER INIEi ® FIAF HYpIAMi V
Ur ILIIY PLLE G71L~
OA
a1NAGE
6
U
L O
E
I
~
M
~
.
.
.
I
LPXE NAINTEroxtE
GA5 LItE - G- L.M.E.
EaScNENI
cos raLrc aG~ GENES
DVERXENO UlILfTY LII[S OH - Sf1. SO,fARE fEEI
iELERNPNF FEREEitt [7] N-S.C. RIILOING SETBACK
L IIJE
S~f~AAY S61kA
ns
~ R, B.S.L PF^~ BUILDINS SEIo~1Cl.
.l
3F, fTnH
YalES wLr Q FENCE UME -f-
UIDEACACGND IREPIgHF LINE ~ UGFP.GVSq -UT-
vWMIMG MawEA iELEPHVE Lfl£
EANIiPRY SEVER MANHOLE ~ 6iGPx Y{vEA XNUgLE
SttYM SEVEA EM9 SEGTigI ~ 5E¢5M 9EVEq INC7
FLF[iRIC iRAXSFPRI6R ® PUY W[H]A Y VIDE
YA1ER XETEA MAGTFR PIL ® Llglr Pp,E
US[LIiY PEOFEIYI 6PoLYU LfGYi (?
AWIiY1flY SEVER Om 6A5 Vfhff
CLf4N Wi
4ATEA METEA Urttlrr .UNIitaY eGY
PAS METEA6 rIEE to 019x
u.'¢RflIPNO G15 MIPELIN¢ ® YaIEA FPJiERUa
NaA,lro Na~FR
EIECrRIfi NfifP6 xq~ILRP PKet1Np S4N:E
sannaRY LareAAL HEN-siemfo RAAMIMG seors
i Ild' YnIER SEAYIC[ LINE - W- ELECFAIf SEIrvIFE LIME - E-
M~fENI fWA(E A.G. iELERKKF SEAViCE LIIF -- ---~'_---
roan ExISi1NP CAaPE M.E.
PAfPoYO GNWE PW./ SYYLE Y/CR10E 9La'4 - __.
vHEEL srfa ~ iAKFIC PLPY aARaY C
~
(PPAN{N6 941PEfl1 i'I _
SaN1IfHV SEYEP CLEW WT
BENCNMARK~
BN. NAM C~56
A BADNZE UISK ON A CONCRETE POSt PRO~CIING 1S
FEET OUi OF THE CROUA7 ALONG US-31, J.7 MkES
NORTH OF I-465,0.7 NRE WE51 OF MESINPN SiREEi
1U9 fEEi VYESi Di THE CENIEALINE OG 5BL Of US'31
A 2 FEET EAST OF R!W fENCE Ai SiAIICN 465.00
ELEVR1gN = B79J6 INGYD 1929:
T.B.M. ~I
FR SPIKE an 5. sde PI PSI porer pole 055 L98
lacelxd as N. aiEe AI Wasl NPin Sheet, JO'E. of
entrance to LM AIFMWRNa Uer6lopnent,CS above
graon0.
ELEY.• B7B355
LEGAL DESCRIPTION • TRACT ! i9ubjecl Parcelt
105 WEST 191.05 FEET i0 THC POINT OF BCGMNINO, CONTANING ],qB ACF
t0 ALL LEGAL EASLNENIS, RIGHTS OF WAY, fNO RESTRIC11ONS OF ffECORO.
\SA'A
.~3.P'R 1.!'R.,
SP~
PARKING ISLAND DE
(NO SCALE?
`,~
V~~C~~~ `
O ~ ~ /
\\j~~~ / /
V s
~ ,
/ /,
/
. /
/
/ /
/ '
~~/ ,.
~``~ i
~~\
a`~~ i /
/ / /
~' ~
~~1101 \~~ / I>«
~~~~ /~
/~~s
%i°' /
n ..
`~~\/ `I
~,~ 0, i
~/ \ \ '
\~~ / i
I /.
y'F~ ~e~W / Wmw
~'.
/ \, / \
.C// ~ \N~
W ~ ~ \\ ~ ~
ckN~r~ ~~ 17 /
~~ i/ ~
% ~
V/' /, ~
i ~' ~ Qy ,
NN v. wn 31.
e ~lwe,~
5W Caner NeA
f Sxnon Z6, f~p~N. R~!{
E
GENERAL MUTES:
I. All OIHENSIONS AAE i0 BACK OF CURB
UNLESS OixERWI SE N07E0.
2. 00 NOi SCAiE FROM THESE PLANS fOR SURVEY
F IELO LOCATIONS.
3• SEE SHEETS Di-t g Oi-2 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS.
d. ALL POINTS Of CONNECTION OF PAOPOSEG SANITARY
AND STORM SEWERS i0 EXI jT IMO SYSTEMS MUST
PE v?'P IF ]EO FRUM A KNOWN BENCHMARK '7ERTICALEY
BEFORE START OP OONSTRUCTI014. ANY CONFLICT
WITR 7HE PLANS MUST BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY.
5. dLL KNOWN UTif IiY LOCAi (OHS SHOWN ARE
APPROX (MATE. Ii IS THE CONTRnCiOR'S
RESPONSIBILITY TO COf+tAGT aEl AEEECTEO
U1ILir IES ANO THE LOCaI U77L IilES' PA01EC710N
SERVICE Pfl IOR TO EMC AVAT ION.
6. SEE SHEET LS-I FOR LANOSCAP ING PLAM/DETAILS.
1. SEE SNffi L-1 FOR LIGHTING PLAN/fl%TURE SCHEDULE.
OVERLAY/SETBACK/LOF COVERAGE INFO
THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED B-E/
eoslNESS DISTRICT UNDER THE
U.S. A[GHWAY OVERLAY ZUNE.
M7 N. SETBACK FROM US. 31 R/W = 90'
MIN, SIDE & REAR YRRO ; 15'
M[N. BLDG. HEIGHT = s8' & 3 OCCUPIABLE FLOORS
MAx. BLDG. RE(GHT = 150 'EXCEPT AGT, MAY NOT
EXCEED a0% CF THE DISTANCE FRAM ANY RES. USE 20NE
MIN, GROSS FLOOR AREA = 15000 S.F.
T07AL GROSS FLOOA AREA = 96.260 S.F,
OIST.OF GROSS FLOOR AREA:
FIRST FLOOR AREA = 19.612 S.F.
FIRST FLOOR AREA % = 19,612 / 96,260 = 20.37%
(MA%. DF 40% FOR FIRST FLOCR GROSS AREA1
SECOND FLODA AREA = 19,162 S.F.
SECOND FLOOR AREA % = 19,162 / 96,260 = 19.91%
fMAX. DF 35'1, FDR SECOND FLOOR GAOSS AREA)
MAX,PAACEL COVERAGE _ 65'1,
SUB. TRACT COVERAGE = 52.23%
IPARKIND = 53194 S.F. + BLDG 19162 S.F,) = 72356 S.F.= 1.56 AC.
MAX. FLOUR AREA RATIO (F.A.R. = 0.70
~` ~ ~~ Q~S~,/
~~ ~, .R,~~ 5-FT Planting Area
eye, ~ ,~lTyp.)
,~ I /'
~' '~ DOCKET NO.OB060020 ADLS
J , . Bp
~'~ Y ~ ~~~
/ 11 / ~ 0, ddd
\ ~4~ ~q,
~~ . ~ ~ ~
~
f
~ / ~
~
~ ~~~
q~ ~ ~
. ~
~ .
~ ~
~
.INE ~
,~ l ~
\\\))) / ~ M
Q ~
~~
~
,8 ~ ~ ~~ f
j~~~ FLOOD HAZARD STATEMENT
~ ~~, ~
~ NONE 9F iHC PROFERIY SHOWN LIES WMHIN THAI SPECIPL FLOOR
F
"
"
/ HAJAgO 20NC
A
AS SHOWN EY CCMMUtdiY PN30. iBCO510207
OF IHE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MARS FOA THE CITY OF CORMEL,
W R HAMkiON COUNTY, IHOVNA IMApB GATED FEBRUARY 19,20031
F 5-FT Planting Ar=a
~Typ.~ _
i, PARKING/DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
~~s
~
3.i08 ACFES
i ZOiViNO = R-6
AST; i04 ROOMS/SUITES = 104 TOTAL ROOMS
ptfES 1 PARK]NG SPACE PER ROOM/SUITE 304 REOOIAEO PARKING SPACES
4572 S.F.T. MEETING SPADE
t PARKING SPACE PER 150 S.F.T. = 30 AEDUIREO PARKMG SPACES
10 EMPLOYEES PER MAX. SHIFT
tPARKING SPACE PEA EMPLOYEE = 10 REOUtREO PARKIN[] SPACES
TOTAL REOUIREO PARKING SPACES = 104 + 30 + 10 = 144
TOTAL PARKING SPACES AROVi0E0 = 118
z
V
~; z_
E~ ~~N
~ Val
ZU
~ A,Wz
~r
O~aEma~ip
~ a~~~
O ~r~Z
;L1; ~ fA _6
~~~
:C 'D Am Z
Iw z
//~nJ
V 1 I..lr
SHEET a
~./ _
,,.1Rev files 11140$lgoodmain4.dgn 1!8!200911:58:57 AM