Hybrid Wall Evaluation for Ten 

New Construction Homes in 

Wyandotte, Michigan

A. Lukachko, A. Grin, and D. Bergey 

Building Science Corporation

January 2013
NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the 

United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency 

thereof, nor any of their employees, subcontractors, or affiliated partners makes any 

warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the 

accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or 

process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade 

name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply 

its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or 

any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not 

necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency 

thereof.

Available electronically at www.osti.gov/bridge

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy

and its contractors, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

phone: 865.576.8401

fax: 865.576.5728

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161

phone: 800.553.6847

fax: 703.605.6900

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov

online ordering: www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste
iii

Hybrid Wall Evaluation for Ten New Construction Homes in 

Wyandotte, Michigan

Prepared for:

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

On behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Building America Program

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

15013 Denver West Parkway 

Golden, CO 80401 

NREL Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 

Prepared by: 

A. Lukachko, A. Grin, and D. Bergey

Building Science Corporation 

30 Forest Street

Somerville, MA 02143 

NREL Technical Monitor: Cheryn Metzger 

Prepared under Subcontract No. KNDJ-0-40337-00

January 2013 
iv

[This page left blank]
v 

Contents

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ vi

List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. vi

Definitions.................................................................................................................................................. vii

Executive Summary................................................................................................................................. viii

1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Background ..............................................................................................................1

1.2 Relevance to Building America Goals .................................................................................3

1.3 Project Location ...................................................................................................................4

2 Mathematical and Modeling Methods................................................................................................. 6

2.1 Energy Modeling Methods ..................................................................................................6

3 Experimental Methods ......................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Testing Methods...................................................................................................................7

3.2 Collection of Utility Bill Data..............................................................................................8

4 Results................................................................................................................................................... 9

4.1 Final Energy Efficient Technology Package .......................................................................9

4.1.1 Enclosure Specifications ..........................................................................................9

4.1.2 Mechanical Specifications .....................................................................................11

4.2 Energy Analysis Results: Cost Effectiveness of the Energy Efficiency Measures ..........15

4.2.1 Background and Cost Information .........................................................................15

4.2.2 BEopt Modeling Results ........................................................................................16

4.3 Airtightness Testing Results ..............................................................................................19

5 Discussion........................................................................................................................................... 21

5.1 General ...............................................................................................................................21

5.2 Documentation ...................................................................................................................21

5.3 Builder Selection and Training ..........................................................................................22

5.4 Foundations ........................................................................................................................23

5.5 Insulation and Air Sealing .................................................................................................23

5.6 Exterior Finishing ..............................................................................................................25

5.7 Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning Installation ...................................................27

5.8 Lighting and Appliances ....................................................................................................27

5.9 Sales and Marketing ...........................................................................................................28

5.10 Purchase Price ........................................................................................................28

5.11 Homebuyer Education ...........................................................................................29

6 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................ 30

6.1 Responses to Research Questions ......................................................................................30

6.2 Future Development for Higher Performance Levels ........................................................31

6.3 Gaps in Existing Measure Guidelines ................................................................................32

6.4 Recommendations for Future Measure Guidelines............................................................32

7 References .......................................................................................................................................... 34

Appendix A: MSHDA Wyandotte, MI NSP2 Target Areas...................................................................... 36

Appendix B: Wyandotte NSP2 Initial Energy Analysis (November 9, 2010) ...................................... 37

Appendix C: Site Visit Reports ................................................................................................................ 42

Appendix D: Project Team Contact Information.................................................................................... 43
vi 

List of Figures

Figure 1. Photograph of a well borehole operation for a GSHP system in the NSP2 neighborhood13

Figure 2. CFIS ventilation schematic ...................................................................................................... 14

Figure 3. Wyandotte NSP2 houses (Walnut 1 and 2) under construction........................................... 14

Figure 4. BEopt parametric study for Wyandotte NSP2 pilot............................................................... 17

Figure 5. Final BEopt energy analysis results by end use ................................................................... 17

Figure 6. BEopt energy analysis by end use for measured whole-house airtightness..................... 18

Figure 7. Final BEopt cost study ............................................................................................................. 18

Figure 8. BEopt energy analysis for GSHP and ASHP options by end use........................................ 19

Figure 9. BEopt cost study for GSHP and ASHP options..................................................................... 19

Figure 10. Example of knockdown framing drawings with partial floor plan ..................................... 21

Figure 11. Example of floor framing plan with mechanical layout....................................................... 22

Figure 12. Photograph of slab edge insulation...................................................................................... 23

Figure 13. Common points of air leakage............................................................................................... 24

Figure 14. Common water management issues with insulating sheathing........................................ 26

Figure 15. Common exterior finishing issues ........................................................................................ 27

Figure 16. Typical duct sealing at boot and through interior partition top plate ............................... 27

Figure 17. Example real estate website listing for Wyandotte NSP2 house ....................................... 28

Figure 19. 247 Walnut Parametric Results Graph.................................................................................. 41

Unless otherwise noted, all figures were created by BSC.

List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of Wyandotte NSP2 Energy Efficiency Package Components............................... 2

Table 2. Proposed NSP2 Allocations by Eligible Use (MSHDA undated).............................................. 4

Table 3. Wyandotte NSP2 Properties by Bid Package ............................................................................ 5

Table 4. Wyandotte NSP2 Enclosure Specifications............................................................................. 10

Table 5. Wyandotte NSP2 Mechanical System Specifications ............................................................. 12

Table 6. Cost Information Summary ....................................................................................................... 16

Table 7. Airtightness Test Results Summary......................................................................................... 20

Table 8. Construction Cost and List Price for Wyandotte NSP2 Homes............................................. 29

Table 9. Basic Dimensions and Areas for 247 Walnut .......................................................................... 39

Table 10. Building Energy Specifications............................................................................................... 40

Table 11. Simulation Results for 247 Walnut ......................................................................................... 40

Table 12. Industry Team Member Contact Information......................................................................... 43

Unless otherwise noted, all tables were created by BSC.
vii 

Definitions

ACH50 Air changes per hour at 50 Pascals

ASHP Air source heat pump

BA Building America Program 

BEopt Building Energy Optimization 

BSC Building Science Corporation

ccSPF Closed-cell spray polyurethane foam

CFIS Central fan integrated supply

CFL Compact fluorescent lighting

cfm Cubic foot per minute

CMU Concrete masonry unit

COP Coefficient of performance

DHW Domestic hot water

EECBG Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant

EF Energy factor

EPS Expanded polystyrene

ft2 Square foot

GSHP Ground source heat pump

HERS Home Energy Rating System

HSPF Heating seasonal performance factor

HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

in. Inch

MBtu Million British thermal units

MSHDA Michigan State Housing Development Authority

NSP2 Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2

OSB Oriented strand board

Pa Pascal

pcf Pounds per cubic foot

PIC Polyisocyanurate

SEER Seasonal energy efficiency ratio

SHGC Solar heat gain coefficient

SPF Spray polyurethane foam

XPS Extruded polystyrene

yr Year
viii

Executive Summary

Under the Wyandotte Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP2), 20 new houses are being 

built and 20 existing houses are being retrofitted in Wyandotte, Michigan. This report details the 

design and construction of 10 new houses in the program. Wyandotte is part of a program led by 

the Michigan State Housing Development Authority consortium, which is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Housing and Urban Development under the NSP2. The City of Wyandotte has 

also been awarded Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant funds from the U.S. 

Department of Energy that are being used to develop a district ground source heat pump (GSHP) 

system to service the project.

This report examines the energy efficiency recommendations for new construction at these 

homes. The report will be of interest to builders of high performance homes in a cold-climate 

zone, particularly where affordability is a priority. Building code officials, designers, and 

homeowners might also find value in the results of this project. 

All of the homes were constructed and fully commissioned by spring 2012. Building Science 

Corporation explored the following research goals and questions with the 10 test houses: 

1. Does the proposed hybrid wall assembly meet expectations for whole-building air 

tightness and construction efficiency? 

2. Can water management details for insulating sheathing be cost-effectively executed by 

the construction team? 

3. Does the total project cost fall within the project requirements and deliver higher than 

expected energy performance?

4. Is the sizing method for the GSHP accurate for small houses with high thermal resistance 

enclosures?

5. Can the GSHP unit be reduced in size to accommodate additional homes on the same 

well?

Results from this research work suggest that the technology package employed (which includes a 

hybrid insulating sheathing and a spray foam insulation, above-grade wall with Advanced 

Framing) does meet the whole-house water, air, and thermal control performance specification 

established for this project, along with the project’s affordability goals. The technology 

specification for the NSP2 houses has achieved a 37% reduction in whole-house energy use 

relative to the Building America Benchmark. This consistent result has been achieved in a 

construction setting that involves several general contractors building the same floor plan with 

different trades and work processes.
1 

1 Introduction

This report describes work conducted by the Building Science Corporation (BSC) Building 

America [BA] Research Team’s Energy Efficient Housing Research Partnerships project.1 This 

technical report covers 10 single-family new homes in Wyandotte, Michigan. 

Through the pilot community evaluation in Wyandotte, BSC has acquired important information 

about the performance of energy efficient technology packages designed for U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) NSP2 projects in a cold climate. This research 

addresses the following important gaps and barriers: 

• Affordable high performance enclosure assemblies

• Complete high performance technology packages for affordable homes. 

Through this work, BSC also collected information about cost and implementation issues with 

hybrid high R-value assemblies.

1.1 Project Background

Wyandotte NSP2 project partners are building 20 new houses and retrofitting 20 existing houses 

in Wyandotte. This project is part of a consortium led by the Michigan State Housing 

Development Authority (MSHDA), which is funded by HUD under the NSP2.2 The City of 

Wyandotte has also been awarded Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) 

funds from the U.S. Department of Energy that are being used to develop a district ground source 

heat pump (GSHP) system to service the project (Table 1).

3

The first 10 new houses constructed in this NSP2 project were selected as part of the BA 

research project.

Research work undertaken by BSC on this project is connected to previous research work on 

high R-value enclosures, the effectiveness of ventilation systems, and other whole-house energy 

efficiency packages for affordable housing, described later. In 2010, BSC undertook a project to 

establish a cold-climate energy efficiency package working with the first three houses in 

Wyandotte’s NSP2 program (Lukachko and Bergey 2010). 

Hybrid wall assemblies have been studied and reported on by BSC in 2010 as part of a high Rvalue wall assembly study (Straube and Smegal 2009), and research work on this technology 

continues. The 2009 study compares many traditional and nontraditional assemblies in terms of 

thermal control, moisture control, cost, and constructability. Findings indicate that a wood frame 

wall with insulating sheathing and a secondary layer of high density spray foam is a costeffective approach to attaining the thermal resistance and airtightness expected of a high R-value 

enclosure. In addition, this approach reduces the risk of wintertime interstitial condensation. In 

the configuration examined, the balance of the cavity can be filled with lower cost insulation. 

 

1 See www.buildingamerica.gov for more information. 2 See www.michigan.gov/mshda/0,1607,7-141--217713--,00.html for more information about the Michigan State 

Housing Development Authority program. See www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/ 

neighborhoodspg/arrafactsheet.cfm for more information about the NSP2. 3 See www1.eere.energy.gov/wip/eecbg.html for more information about the DOE EECBG grant.
2 

Table 1. Summary of Wyandotte NSP2 Energy Efficiency Package Components

Wyandotte NSP2 Specifications

NSP2 Program Specifications 2010 BA Benchmark

Building Enclosure

Roof 

R-45 unvented cathedralized attic

5-in. ccSPF to underside of roof 

sheathing with R-13 fiberglass batt in 

cavity

R-38 

Walls

R-32 hybrid insulation walls with

2-in. EPS insulating sheathing (R-7);

2-in. ccSPF to inside of wall sheathing 

(R12);

R-13 fiberglass batt insulation in stud 

cavity (R-13)

R-13 batt + R-5 

insulating sheathing

Basement Floors R-10 full-width subslab insulation with 

2-in. XPS insulation (R-10) Uninsulated 

Basement Walls R-13 full-height interior insulation with 

2-in. PIC insulation (R-13) Uninsulated 

Windows 

Above grade: Vinyl double-glazed 

(U = 0.32, SHGC = 0.32) 

Basement: glass block windows 

(U = 0.6, SHGC = 0.6) 

Above grade: U = 0.35, 

SHGC = 0.35 

Basement: glass block 

windows 

(U = 0.6, SHGC = 0.6)

Infiltration 2.2 ACH50 8.8 ACH50

Mechanical Systems

Heating GSHP, 3.7 COP 7.2-HSPF air source heat 

pump

Cooling GSHP, 3.7 COP 10-SEER air source heat 

pump

DHW 0.94-EF electric tank water heater 0.86-EF electric tank 

water heater

Ducts All ducts in conditioned space R-6 ductwork in attic, 

15% total leakage

Ventilation CFIS supply-only as per ASHRAE 62.2 

(ASHRAE 2010) 

45-cfm continuous 

ventilation with 

ASHRAE 62.2-rated 

exhaust fan

Appliances and 

Lighting

Lighting 100% fluorescent 33% fluorescent

Appliances ENERGY STAR appliances Standard appliances

Notes: EPS, expanded polystyrene; XPS, extruded polystyrene; PIC, polyisocyanurate; SHGC, solar heat gain 

coefficient; ACH50, air changes per hour at 50 Pa; COP, coefficient of performance; HSPF, heating seasonal 

performance factor; SEER, seasonal energy efficiency ratio; DHW, domestic hot water; EF, energy factor; CFIS, 

central fan integrated supply (a mechanical ventilation design; www.fancycler.com/ for more information) 
3 

The enclosure included in the Wyandotte NSP2 energy efficiency package is a hybrid insulation 

assembly using Advanced Framing (Lstiburek and Grin 2010; BSC 2009), insulating sheathing 

as the primary thermal control layer and the drainage plane (BSC 2007; Baker 2006), and 2.0-pcf 

closed-cell spray polyurethane foam (ccSPF) insulation for thermal control and airtightness. In 

addition to providing air sealing and condensation protection, ccSFF increases the R-value 

within the cavity, which allows the thickness of insulating sheathing to be reduced. This 

eliminates the relatively tricky installation of the second layer of rigid foam and the associated 

window and trim details. Spray foam is installed by a dedicated skilled contractor. It is easy to fit 

into the production schedule and is especially economical when many houses can be insulated in 

close succession.

The NSP2 package draws on whole-house energy efficiency research work that has been 

published by BSC in the builder’s field guides series (Lstiburek 2006) and in research reports on 

community-scale evaluations in cold and other climate zones (BSC 2011; BSC 2010). The 

Wyandotte houses offer a community-scale demonstration of an energy efficient technology 

package in construction conditions compatible with the constraints of large-scale production 

home builders. In particular, the affordability aspects of the NSP2 package draw on past coldclimate research work with Habitat for Humanity (BSC 2010; BSC 2002) and other community 

builders (BSC 2008; BSC 1999). 

Contact information for the project team members can be found in Appendix D. 

1.2 Relevance to Building America Goals

Overall, the goal of the U.S. Department of Energy’s BA program is to “reduce home energy use 

by 30%–50% (compared to 2009 energy codes for new homes and pre-retrofit energy use for 

existing homes).” To this end, BSC conducts research to “develop market-ready energy solutions 

that improve efficiency of new and existing homes in each U.S. climate zone, while increasing 

comfort, safety, and durability.”4

The technology package proposed for this pilot community project is most appropriate for 

affordable single-family or attached 11⁄2-story houses with basements. From a building science 

perspective, the Wyandotte NSP2 package is suitable for other cold-climate NSP2 projects. The 

information gained through this research about implementing the technology package at a 

community scale, along with the longer term performance data from the community of houses, 

will support widespread deployment of this package in new housing across the cold-climate 

zone. 

The most immediate effect of the research project will be to inform the work of the 12 Michigan 

municipalities that are part of the Michigan NSP2 consortium. These municipalities are Detroit, 

Highland Park, Hamtramck, Wyandotte, Flint, Saginaw, Pontiac, Lansing, Battle Creek, 

Kalamazoo, Grand Rapids, and Benton Harbor. The consortium has received approximately 

$224 million in funding from HUD for redevelopment of blighted and vacant land within the 

participating communities (see Table 2). Looking at “Use E”—the funding for the 

redevelopment of vacant properties—BSC estimates that the research work with Wyandotte will 

affect the construction of more than 100 new Michigan homes within the first round of NSP2 

 

4 See http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/residential/ba_index.html for more information.
4 

development and 50–100 additional homes that could be constructed in subsequent rounds of 

development as the sales revenue from the project is redeployed.

Table 2. Proposed NSP2 Allocations by Eligible Use (MSHDA undated)

Target Market NSP2 Funds Percent of Requested 

NSP2 Funds 

Administration $26,350,000 10%

Use A—Financing Mechanisms $13,175,000 5%

Use B—Purchase and Rehabilitation of 

Abandoned or Foreclosed Homes and Residential 

Properties to 

Sell, Rent, or Redevelop 

$105,400,000 40% 

Use C—Land Bank Acquisitions and 

Management of Foreclosed 

Residential Properties

$26,350,000 10% 

Use D—Demolition Blighted Structures $65,875,000 25%

Use E—Redevelop Demolished or 

Vacant Properties $26,350,000 10% 

Total $263,500,000 100%

The project also has the potential to affect BA measure guidelines on high R-value enclosure 

assemblies (walls, roofs, foundations) for cold climates and GSHPs. The Wyandotte NSP2 

community might also offer an opportunity for long-term research on GSHP system performance 

in individual homes, in shared-well installations, and at a community-scale installation.

1.3 Project Location 

All the construction for this project will be done in the NSP2 neighborhood in Wyandotte (see 

Figure 1 and Appendix A). As the project progresses, specific property addresses will be drawn 

from a preselected inventory of vacant or foreclosed properties. Table 3 lists the houses by unit 

type (property addresses are not reported) and shows how the construction of the houses will be 

tendered in sequence for construction. 
5 

Table 3. Wyandotte NSP2 Properties by Bid Package

NSP2 Bid Pack 1

Item New Address Type Style

1 Cedar 1a Existing 11⁄2 story

2 Walnut 1 b New Design 11⁄2 story

3 Walnut 2 b New Design 11⁄2 story

NSP2 Bid Pack 2

Item New Address Type Style

1 Vinewood 1 b * New Modified 11⁄2 story

2 Poplar 1 b New Modified 11⁄2 story

3 Cora 3 b New Design 11⁄2 story

4 Cora 4 b New Design Ranch

5 Cora 1 b New Design Ranch

6 Cora 2 New Modified 11⁄2 story

7 Cedar 1 a Existing 11⁄2 story

NSP2 Bid Pack 4

Item New Address Type Style

1 Poplar 2 b TBD TBD

2 Vinewood 2 b TBD TBD

3 Poplar 3 TBD TBD

4 Cora 5 b TBD TBD

5 Cora 6 TBD TBD

6 Poplar 4 TBD TBD

7 Poplar 5 TBD TBD a These houses have been included in BSC’s TO2 8.5 project.

b These houses have been included in BSC’s TO2 4.3 project.
6 

2 Mathematical and Modeling Methods

2.1 Energy Modeling Methods

BSC analyzed the initial drawings the design team supplied to establish the level of energy 

efficiency that the as-designed, code-level homes were likely to achieve. This was followed by 

BSC analysis to determine measures needed to achieve energy target levels; the development of 

recommendations for moisture control, durability, and indoor air quality improvements; and the 

discussion of relevant construction details with the design and construction team. 

BSC used a systems engineering approach, which looks at the performance of the house as a 

whole instead of focusing only on the building elements related to specific disciplines. 

Recommended improvements were considered because of their benefit for multiple subsystems 

in the home and their benefit to the overall house performance. Although energy is the most 

important driver for improvement in BA research, other vital attributes were considered, 

including sustainability, durability, comfort, and indoor air quality. 

The energy analysis is presented as a parametric study. The overall energy reduction is broken 

down into incremental changes to show what impact a specific improvement has on overall 

performance (i.e., “How much energy does this house save from upgrading the windows?”). This 

portion of the research work involved continuous back and forth correspondence with the design 

team, including discussions on the feasibility of incorporating various measures into the builder’s 

practices and on the cost implications. 

Whole-house hourly energy simulations were completed to calculate the source energy 

consumption savings for the target house compared to the 2010 BA benchmark definition created 

by the U.S. Department of Energy. An explanation of site and source energy can be found in 

Ueno and Straube (2010). 

The following tools were used: 

• Energy modeling through computer simulations (including the Building Energy 

Optimization [BEopt] tool, a house energy simulation program and primary analysis tool 

for BA homes) to predict the energy savings of the home; this analysis is performed on 

all BA homes so that a percent energy savings is calculated

• HVAC design - Manual J8 heating and cooling load calculation, equipment sizing, and 

duct layouts (ACCA 2011). 
7 

3 Experimental Methods

3.1 Testing Methods

All 10 test homes were performance tested by a local Home Energy Rating System (HERS) rater 

employed by the City of Wyandotte. BSC conducted a broader program of testing on a limited 

number of houses. The performance testing is intended to confirm that the house meets the 

energy efficiency specification of the technology package. 

The BSC performance testing included the following measurements: 

• Blower door test to measure the house infiltration rate

• Duct blaster test to measure duct leakage (both total duct leakage and duct leakage to 

outside) 

• Outside air ventilation rate measurement

• Register flow measurement (to ensure proper airflow from each supply register) 

• HVAC equipment static pressures (measures steady state operation of air handler 

equipment) 

• Bedroom to hallway pressure difference while door is closed (to ensure that the transfer 

grille or the jump ducts were sized properly to prevent room pressurization when the door 

is closed).

Indoor temperature and relative humidity measurements were also taken during site visits.

Pending agreements with the homeowners, these conditions might be logged over the long term. 

If implemented, these measurements will continue into 2013. 

The analysis of the building performance testing will include conversion of the CFM50 blower 

door result to additional units of infiltration rates. Below is the equation for converting a CFM50

result to ACH50: 

ACH50 = [cfm 50 / conditioned volume (cf)] * 60 

Duct blaster results, both total and duct leak to outside, were compared between the 10 project 

homes. Outside air measurements were taken to confirm proper ventilation rates in the project 

homes. Register cfm and air handler static pressures were measured as part of the HVAC 

commissioning process. The individual register cfm flows were compared to the Manual J8 

design flows. 

In addition to the information BSC gathered, the public utility that is owned by the City of 

Wyandotte will collect basic long-term data. The data will not be analyzed by the researchers in 

this project but would be available for use by future investigators. 
8 

3.2 Collection of Utility Bill Data

Community-scale projects deliver the best performance feedback to the BA program. For this 

project, the City of Wyandotte will hold responsibility for collecting monthly utility bill data for 

each constructed home and, if possible, for similar new or existing houses in the NSP2 project 

area. Monthly utility bills include the monthly dollar amount, units of energy used (e.g., therms 

of gas, kilowatt-hours of electricity, and gallons of propane), and floor plan type. The study 

period is typically 2 or 3 years following construction. BSC will analyze the data semiannually 

and distribute a report to all research partners. 

For each NSP2 house, a release form signed by the new homeowner will be collected at the time 

of sale. The City of Wyandotte has proposed that this be included in the purchase agreement for 

each house. Homeowners will be given an explanation of the BA program, the goals and 

objectives for the Wyandotte project, and a statement of how the data will be used. The data will 

be connected to the type of house built (e.g., Plan type A) but does not need to be connected to a 

particular homeowner (i.e., the data can be anonymous). 

A complete analysis of the data also requires data collection from a matching group of houses 

that are built to “normal” standards. For Wyandotte, this could involve recruiting participants 

from existing houses in the neighborhood given that the city-owned utility is the service provider 

of electricity for all houses in Wyandotte. Some houses in Wyandotte have gas service, and a 

separate arrangement will need to be made to secure the full participation of occupants of 

existing houses in the area. Although firm plans have not yet been made, a study of the wholehouse energy use on this scale would also fit well with the city’s plan to build a GSHP-based 

district system. An expanded study would yield solid information about how existing houses in 

the area use energy compared to the new houses built or renovated to a higher performance 

standard. The city might, in fact, have already collected this information, and city representatives 

are investigating this possibility.
9 

4 Results

This section of the report details the results of the following:

• The work to refine the energy efficiency technology package for the project (including 

the enclosure and mechanical specifications)

• The energy analysis of the package (including the cost effectiveness of the selected 

measures)

• The performance testing of the completed houses. 

4.1 Final Energy Efficient Technology Package 

This section describes the final package of energy efficient technology that was developed for 

the Wyandotte NSP2. The package was developed through discussions between BSC, the City of 

Wyandotte staff (including building department officials), and the project architect. As part of 

these discussions, BSC analyzed this specification, and Appendix B contains an initial energy 

analysis for comparison. 

This project included constraints that affected the selection of energy efficient technology. The 

most significant one was the choice to use GSHP systems for heating and cooling for all NSP2 

houses. Wyandotte city planners made this choice early in the project as part of a strategy to 

introduce green technology into the city-owned utility’s portfolio. The long-term vision for 

Wyandotte is to create a district system that will start with the NSP2 neighborhood and then 

expand to service the remaining city center areas. The city contracted for supply and installation 

of the GSHP systems and wells before the housing program was started. As a result, the 

individual houses examined for BA started with the GSHP as a fixed element of the technology 

package, constraining both system choice and total cost. 

The proposed construction technology was also intended to be compatible with the technology 

traditionally employed by trades in the Wyandotte area. This limited the selection of enclosure 

systems but was compatible with the proposed high thermal resistance hybrid wall recommended 

by BSC.

4.1.1 Enclosure Specifications

Table 4 summarizes the enclosure design. 
10 

Table 4. Wyandotte NSP2 Enclosure Specifications

Enclosure Specifications

Roof

Description Dark color asphalt shingles on rafter roof, unvented cathedralized 

attic

Insulation 3-in. (R-18) ccSPF on underside of roof, R-28 fiberglass batt below

Walls

Description Hybrid wall with insulating sheathing and spray foam

Insulation 2-in. (R-10) XPS sheathing, 2-in. (R-12) ccSPF in cavity, 3.5-in. (R12) fiberglass

Foundation

Description Conditioned basement/crawlspace

Insulation 2-in. XPS (R-10) or 2-in. (R-12) ccSPF on walls

Windows

Description Double-pane vinyl framed with low emissivity spectrally selective 

glazing

Manufacturer Anderson

U-Value 0.28

SHGC 0.29

Infiltration

Specification 2.5-in.2 leakage area per 100-ft2 enclosure @ 50 Pa

Performance Test Initial test result = 2.0-in.2 leakage area per 100-ft2 enclosure @ 50 Pa

4.1.1.1 Roof

The architectural designs for the NSP2 houses employ several roof assembly types in each 

house. The most common assembly is a cathedralized unvented attic that employs 4 in. of 2.0-pcf 

ccSPF sprayed to the underside (interior) of the roof sheathing with fiberglass batt to fill the 

rafter cavity. This allows the kneewall spaces to be used for ductwork distribution and gives the 

homeowner generous storage areas. Some house designs allow for a partial vented roof 

assembly. In this part of the roof area, cellulose insulation is installed on the ceiling plane. 

4.1.1.2 Walls

The above-grade structure of the houses is 2 × 6 construction with Advanced Framing. The 

house designs vary significantly to fit in with neighboring houses: one of the plans is a full twostory house, two are one-and-a-half story houses, and two are single-story houses. Engineered 

wood floor joists, rim joists, and beams are commonly used. Dormers and gable bedrooms on the 

second floors are common, so most of the roofs are framed with dimensional lumber with 

oriented strand board (OSB) roof sheathing. Shear panels are provided in exterior walls where 

needed. The houses typically use OSB panels, but several houses were constructed with 

structural insulated sheathing panels to slightly increase the R-value of the walls where these 

shear panels are located. These panels, however, added to the construction time, so after this 

experiment, the design team decided to return to OSB panels for the remainder of the 

construction. 
11 

Exterior walls employ a hybrid insulation approach: the advanced frame structure is clad with 

1.5 in. or 2 in. of XPS insulating sheathing, the interior surface of the sheathing is sprayed with 

2.0-pcf ccSPF insulation (in the framing cavity) to a depth of 2 in., and the remainder of the 

framing cavity is insulated with fiberglass batt insulation. The exterior surface of the insulating 

sheathing is taped with sheathing tape and integrated with windows, doors, and other 

penetrations to form a drainage plane. A variety of claddings are used in the architectural plans, 

but vinyl siding applied directly over the face of the insulating sheathing and fastened to the 

framing is the most common. This treatment covers the majority of the surface area on each 

house. The insulating sheathing and ccSPF form the primary air barrier system. Penetrations 

through top and bottom plates for services are sealed to compartmentalize the framing cavities. 

In this configuration, the ccSPF effectively controls vapor diffusion and surface temperature of 

the (interior) condensing surface to limit the risk of wintertime interstitial condensation. This 

assembly is considered to be a vapor-open assembly, in that each enclosure layer from the ccSPF 

can dry to either the interior or exterior. 

4.1.1.3 Foundation

All of the NSP2 houses are constructed on a full basement foundation. Builders were awarded 

bid packs (groups of several houses to be constructed) that allowed them to choose the 

foundation structure. Approximately half the houses were constructed with a site cast concrete 

foundation and the remaining houses with a concrete masonry unit (CMU) foundation. This 

difference is not considered to be significant from an energy perspective. The basement walls are 

insulated with full-height foil-faced PIC insulation. Basement floor slabs are insulated under the 

entire surface with 2 in. of XPS insulation. The subslab insulation is turned up at the slab edges 

as a thermal break and to maintain continuity with the foundation wall insulation. 

4.1.1.4 Windows

The manufacturer of the windows installed varies slightly with the builder. All windows, though, 

have vinyl frames with low emissivity spectrally selective glazing and meet the same 

performance specification: a U-value of 0.28 and an SHGC of 0.29. This glazing technology has 

some secondary benefits as well, such as reducing ultraviolet damage on interior floors or fading 

on furniture. The flanged window units are integrated with the exterior face of the insulating 

sheathing with flashing tape. All window openings were first lined with pan flashing. After 

insulation, low expansion foam was used as an air seal between the window unit and the framing 

of the rough opening. 

4.1.1.5 Infiltration

The air infiltration rate target is the BSC BA infiltration goal of 2.5 in2 of free area per 100 ft2 of 

enclosure. The layer of spray foam applied to the interior side of the wall and roof sheathing is 

the primary air barrier system. The low expanding spray foam that is installed between the 

window frame and the rough opening is the transition from the wall to the window unit. In the 

basement, rim joist areas are sealed from the inside with ccSPF to connect the basement wall 

insulation to the underside of the first-floor deck. The basement floor and concrete structure 

completes the whole-house air barrier system.

4.1.2 Mechanical Specifications

Table 5 summarizes the mechanical systems used in the NSP2 project. 
12 

Table 5. Wyandotte NSP2 Mechanical System Specifications

Mechanical Systems Specifications

Heating

Description 9.2-HSPF GSHP

Manufacturer and Model WaterFurnace

Cooling (Outdoor Unit)

Description 18-SEER GSHP

Manufacturer and Model WaterFurnace

Cooling (Indoor Unit)

Description Electronically Commutated Motor air handler with heat pump coil

Manufacturer and Model WaterFurnace

DHW

Description Tank electric hot water heater (EF = 0.98), desuperheater

Manufacturer and Model Rheem

Distribution

Description R-6 flex ducts in conditioned unvented cathedralized attic

Leakage Maximum 5% duct leakage to outside

Ventilation

Description

Supply-only system with Aprilaire 8126 ventilation control system, 

33% 

Duty Cycle: 10 min on; 20 min off, 50-cfm average flow

Manufacturer and Model Aprilaire 8126 ventilation control system fan cycler

Return Pathways

Description Central return on first floor, jump ducts in bedrooms

GSHPs shift energy consumption from direct combustion to electricity, and have higher COPs 

than air source heat pumps, especially during periods of extreme temperatures when building 

loads are highest. Their application in single-family homes is limited because of the high cost of 

drilling. The horizontal heat exchangers common in residential construction also reduce 

performance. 

As part of the project, the City of Wyandotte will drill vertical boreholes (see Figure 2) at each 

NSP2 property in the city-owned portion of the front yard. These wells are estimated to support 

GSHP units totaling 6 to 8 tons. The expectation is that although each well will initially connect 

to only one NSP2 house, in the long term, Wyandotte Municipal Services will connect two or 

three houses to each well and possibly join the wells together to create a district GSHP system. 

The utility will lease the heat exchanger back to the house occupants. In this way, the per-house 

cost of the system is reduced, and the cost is amortized over a longer period than most 

homebuyers or builders can accommodate. A more complete discussion of costs is provided in 

Section 4.2.1. The energy efficiency of each NSP2 project is important because the load on the 

well will determine whether one or two additional houses can be added to the well. The City of 

Wyandotte has agreed to handle the long-term collection of energy use data for these homes and 

is interested in the possibility of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory monitoring the 

district GSHP system. 
13 

Figure 1. Photograph of a well borehole operation for a GSHP system in the NSP2 neighborhood

Room by room Manual J8 system sizing and duct layout calculations were performed by BSC on 

several of the plans to confirm duct design and system sizing. The very efficient enclosure and 

HVAC system resulted in smaller GSHPs than had been anticipated. 

The package specifies a CFIS that has been extensively researched and tested by BSC (Hendron 

et al. 2008; Rudd 2008). This system draws outside air via a 5-in. flex duct to the return plenum 

of the HVAC system (see Figure 3). This allows the introduction of outside air to the living 

space whenever space conditioning is already operating. Fan cycling will turn on the fan at a 

33% duty cycle (10 min on, 20 min off), drawing outside air during periods of no space 

conditioning. A 6-in. mechanical damper is also installed on the 6-in. outside air duct. The 

damper is controlled by the fan cycler and will close off the outside air duct during periods of 

consistent space conditioning to prevent overventilation of the living space. 
14 

Figure 2. CFIS ventilation schematic

In addition to the building enclosure and mechanical system specifications described, ENERGY 

STAR appliances and compact fluorescent lighting (CFL) fixtures are to be installed in all homes 

with the goal of further reducing internal loads and electricity use. 

Figure 3. Wyandotte NSP2 houses (Walnut 1 and 2) under construction
15 

4.2 Energy Analysis Results: Cost Effectiveness of the 

Energy Efficiency Measures

4.2.1 Background and Cost Information

The project team designed the Wyandotte NSP2 energy efficient solution package to meet the 

cost and performance requirements of houses eligible for the HUD NSP2in the cold-climate 

zone. Specifically, the Wyandotte NSP2 project, administered under MSHDA’s NSP2 

Consortium, aims to build a significant number of houses that can be sold or rented to 

households earning less than 50% of the area median income. This is a different working 

definition of cost effectiveness than is typically used for BA projects. The result will be that 

robust solutions developed for the NSP2 in Wyandotte will be appropriate for both affordable 

and market-rate housing. 

BSC participated in the project architect’s work to value engineer the plans and specifications to 

meet the affordability requirement. BSC has analyzed energy efficiency measures and other 

elements of the technology package to optimize the cost. This effort to reduce the construction 

cost while maintaining or increasing the energy performance of the houses will continue 

throughout each phase of the program. The objective of the work was to develop a package that 

can be built for approximately $120/ft2

 and use approximately 30% less whole-house energy 

than required by 2009 energy codes (ICC 2010). The City of Wyandotte established the $120/ft2

cost as the program target by based on the NSP2 funding and the expected sale price of the 

finished homes. 

Initial cost studies of the Wyandotte NSP2 package indicated that the new houses could be built 

for between $135 and $145/ft2

. 

Table 6 records reported incremental costs for energy efficiency measures in the final technology 

package.
16 

Table 6. Cost Information Summary

Category Description Cost Source

Wall Hybrid R-32 default

Windows Double GlazedVinyl 

(U = 0.28, SHGC = 0.29) $6,500 Builder pricing (average)

Window flashing $400 Builder pricing

Roof Unfinished attic default

Finished 5-in. ccSPF + R-13 default

Foundation Full-height R-10 rigid insulation $2,400 Builder pricing

Capillary break at footing $150 Builder pricing

Infiltration 2.5 ACH50 default

Ventilation CFIS $365 Builder pricing

Jump ducts, transfer grilles $150 Builder pricing

Duct System Ducted supply and panned return $1,750 Builder pricing

Fully ducted return $900 Builder pricing

Duct Sealing Conventional (tape) $175 Builder pricing

Recommended (mastic) $275 Builder pricing

Heating and 

Cooling 18 SEER GSHP, 3.7 COP $11,800 BSC cost data sheet (for 3 

ton; less $800 for DHW)

Well for GSHP $10,000 Builder pricing

Hot Water Electric tank with desuperheater 

connection to GSHP $800 Builder pricing

Lighting 100% CFL 0.98 BSC cost data sheet 

(per square foot)

Appliances ENERGY STAR washer, 

refrigerator $800 

BSC cost data sheet 

(imputed, 2/5 of $2,000 

for 5 appliances)

4.2.2 BEopt Modeling Results

The cost effectiveness of the energy efficiency measures considered for these projects was 

analyzed with BEopt, the BA performance analysis tool. This tool includes an optimization 

capability that uses user-supplied cost data and energy use information. The output is a specified 

set of energy saving measures to determine combinations of measures that are optimal or near 

optimal in terms of cost effectiveness. BEopt plots the average source energy savings per year 

against the annualized energy related costs. In this output, the optimal packages are those that 

form the lower bound of the plotted data points. Because BEopt uses a sequential searching 

technique, not every possible combination of options is simulated. 

BEopt modeling confirms that each proposed building upgrade reduces the annual source energy 

requirement. Using price data from BEopt, the total annual energy-related dollar cost is roughly 

constant as the upgrades proceed. In many cases this reflects lumping what could be construed as 

multiple upgrades into a single building component. For instance, going from R-19 walls to R-24 

saves more energy than upgrading from R-27 to the final nominal R-value of 32. If plotted 
17 

separately, these two measures would appear as one that saved money and one that saved energy 

at some additional cost.

Figure 5 presents the parametric study results. This study was used to help assess cost saving 

measures early in the design process.

Figure 4. BEopt parametric study for Wyandotte NSP2 pilot

The analysis was repeated toward the end of the design process for the final technology 

specification after several refinements had been made (Figure 6). The results indicated an 

estimated 32% reduction in annual whole house energy use compared to the BA benchmark. 

Figure 5. Final BEopt energy analysis results by end use
18 

The analysis was updated after performance testing of the houses to include measured wholehouse airtightness values (Figure 7). Values of 2.2 ACH50, 1.9 ACH50, and 1.5 ACH50 were 

chosen to represent the typical, excellent, and best measurements, respectively, from a range of 

houses tested. 

Using what BSC considers to be the typical airtightness of a house in the program, the results 

indicated an estimated 37% reduction in annual whole house energy use compared to the BA 

benchmark. 

Figure 6. BEopt energy analysis by end use for measured whole-house airtightness

Figure 8 displays the results of the BEopt cost study for the final package. The annualized cost 

curve for the full optimization has an unusual shape, showing many measures with very large 

cost savings. The cost savings come from downsizing the GSHP from 5 tons to a minimum of 

1.5 tons. Not all of these options are possible for this project. 

Figure 7. Final BEopt cost study
19 

Recall that the choice of GSHP equipment for the houses included in this project was made as a 

separate decision by the City of Wyandotte. Some additional analysis was completed to further 

understand the potential effect of a different heating and cooling selection. In its benchmark 

mode, BEOpt does not allow a comparison of GSHP directly to an air source heat pump (ASHP) 

or other heating system. The following graphs compare GSHP to several different ASHP 

equipment selections in terms of energy (Figure 9) and cost (Figure 10).

Figure 8. BEopt energy analysis for GSHP and ASHP options by end use

Figure 9. BEopt cost study for GSHP and ASHP options

The GSHP option for heating and cooling is (according to BEopt) the most efficient of the 

compared options, but it is considerably more expensive than the ASHP options. 

4.3 Airtightness Testing Results

Table 7 summarizes the performance testing results for the houses completed under the research 

program. 
20 

Table 7. Airtightness Test Results Summary

House Number Airtightness Test Results

CFM50 ACH50 CFM50/ft2

Walnut 1 1030 2.7 0.20

Walnut 2 1007 2.6 0.19

Cora 5 678 3.6 0.49

Vinewood 2 539 2.7 0.36

Poplar 4 447 2.3 0.31

Cora 1 407 2.1 0.28

Poplar 3 202 0.92 0.14

Cora 2 197 1.0 0.14

Cora 6 148 0.8 0.11

Vinewood 1 n/a n/a n/a

Appendix C contains additional performance testing and site visit reports.
21 

5 Discussion

5.1 General

The NSP2 project in Wyandotte is producing housing that generally meets or exceeds the 

specifications. Some challenges need to be overcome to reach targets on energy efficiency and 

cost, but given the commitment of the City of Wyandotte and the responsiveness of the builders, 

these targets seem within reach.

5.2 Documentation

The project has a special bid process and other MSHDA requirements that would not be found in 

typical projects, and these contribute to the level of detail in the drawings. Although atypical, this 

documentation set is an excellent example of the level of detail that is needed for the 

construction of a high performance home using new construction techniques. 

One area where communication with the builders could be improved through additional drawing 

work is in the framing details, particularly for locations where blocking is needed to attach trim 

and exterior services. This could be addressed by preparing “knockdown” framing drawings (see 

Figure 12) for each plan set. An additional benefit of this approach would be greater consistency 

between framing crews working for different builders on the same plan types. This drawing work 

does, however, add costs to each set of drawings, and the drawings for most of the planned unit 

types have already been completed and bid. This communication is likely to take place on site 

instead.

Figure 10. Example of knockdown framing drawings with partial floor plan

Another drawing-related issue is the separation of architectural and mechanical information. This 

stems from a unique situation on the Wyandotte project: the mechanical design and installation 

was bid as a separate package. With the separation also extending to the construction site (the 

builder of the house does not hold the contract for the mechanical system installation), the layout 
22 

of the mechanical system has been negotiated on the construction site. In a more conventional 

situation, BSC would recommend an integration drawing like the example in Figure 12. 

Figure 11. Example of floor framing plan with mechanical layout

If future phases of the Wyandotte project were expected to involve further drawing work, 

additional refinement of the drawing sets would likely be possible. One consideration that should 

be taken into account is the possibility for additional material and labor savings if future unit 

types are developed using a 24-in. module and the framing package is optimized using the 

framing plans rather than by the builder during construction. 

5.3 Builder Selection and Training

Advanced Framing techniques were identified early on in the project as an area where special 

training would be needed. The project team decided that all bidders on the project would be 

required to attend an Advanced Framing workshop. This approach ensured that the successful 

bidder had detailed information about what would be expected before submitting a price. This 

strategy also meant that bidders that were not chosen to be participate in the project would also 

gain some exposure to Advanced Framing and other energy efficient technologies included in the 

technology specification, which is consistent with BA’s industry transformation objective. 

BSC staff conducted workshops on June 18 and October 6, 2011. The presentation material and 

attendance list for these workshops are included in Appendix C. A typical workshop included 

three parts: an introduction to BA and high performance housing, a presentation on Advanced 

Framing, and an on-site discussion of framing details. BSC was able to demonstrate and explain 

blower door testing in one of the workshops. 
23 

5.4 Foundations

As mentioned previously, builders chose either cast-in-place concrete or CMU foundations. 

From a structural perspective, these systems provide equivalent performance but CMU 

foundations present additional challenges for the control of air flow and bulk water intrusion. 

The installation of a “dimple sheet” membrane on the exterior of the CMU foundations would 

allow bulk water control to be significantly improved. 

A roller-applied capillary break on the footing was specified, and installation was verified on 

several houses, but it was not clear that installation occurred in all cases.

The subslab XPS insulation was turned up at the slab edges but some interior partitions were 

installed before the foundation wall insulation, complicating the air sealing and thermal 

insulation (as pictured in Figure 13).

Figure 12. Photograph of slab edge insulation

5.5 Insulation and Air Sealing

The hybrid insulation strategy chosen for this project allowed the construction teams to 

consistently achieve a high level of airtightness and insulation installation quality. The process 

could, however, be improved in several areas. 

BSC staff observed that a significant amount of air leakage was occurring in several areas in the 

house that was tested. From previous experience with ccSPF installations, these are common 

problems that can generally be addressed with additional training and minor adjustments to the 

scope of work for the framing crew and insulation installers. Figure 14 describes several areas 

that have been identified on several houses under construction.
24 

#1 Rim joists

There are two issues with this detail. The 

first (A) is a common issue. If the first floor 

joist inside of the rim joist is too close, the 

closed cell spray polyurethane foam 

(ccSPF) installer may have difficulty 

angling the applicator to spray foam from 

the sill plate, up the rim joist, to the 

underside of the floor deck. The foam 

might or might not expand to seal this 

area. Inspection after foaming is difficult. 

The second issue (B) is uncommon. The 

first floor overhangs the sill plate to align 

with a brick veneer. This detail must have 

blocking for spray foam and creates a 

surface that is difficult to reach from the 

interior.

#2 Beam pockets

A beam has not been grouted into place. 

The underside of an exterior deck is visible 

through the opening (A). This area cannot 

be easily sealed or inspected from the 

outside. The geometry of structural 

elements in this location makes air sealing 

with spray foam difficult. It is likely that 

cavities behind and around the beam and 

wood blocking will not be fully sealed.

#3 Framing at dormers

Blocking is missing between the rafters in 

the dormer. The dormer side wall framing 

creates an air leakage path that is not 

sealed by the SPF installation. 

#4 Air seal from rafter to floor deck The 

rafter bays pictured have blocking and are 

ready for SPF installation. Preliminary 

blower door testing indicated that 

significant leakage occurred in this area.

Figure 13. Common points of air leakage

B A

A
25 

5.6 Exterior Finishing

As houses were moved through the construction process, several details related to the insulating 

sheathing were identified as needing special attention. These are discussed in Figure 15. 

#1 Roof to wall flashing

A roofing membrane has been run up the wall from 

the roof sheathing and step flashing properly 

installed with the shingles. It is not clear, however, 

that the roof membrane bridges to the roof deck. 

The top of the membrane strip might not be not 

properly integrated with the surface of the 

insulating sheathing. BSC recommends that 

sheathing tape be used to terminate the top of the 

membrane, or, even better, the membrane be 

regletted into the insulating sheathing. 

#2 Similar roof to wall detail

No transition membrane or step flashing has been 

installed.

#3 Similar roof to wall detail

Here there is no membrane but step flashing has 

been installed. Note that in this case, the drainage 

plane is not carried over onto the roof surface but 

instead will allow water to drain behind the step 

flashing.

#4 Bottom flange of window

The bottom flange of this window has been sealed 

with flashing tape. This will not allow the window 

unit and window opening to be drained to the 

exterior as intended. This issue is typically 

resolved easily by removing the tape and 

discussing with the installer.
26 

#5 Sheathing tape

The sheathing tape has not been rolled after 

application and the tape has bubbled. Even on a 

vertical joint, this increases the risk of water 

penetration and must be corrected.

Figure 14. Common water management issues with insulating sheathing

Figure 16 describes other areas of concern.

#1 Deck ledgers

The ledgers for attached desks should be “stood off” 

the structural frame to allow for continuous 

insulation and a continuous drainage plane down to 

the foundation wall level. This detail is at lower risk 

of water-related damage because the attached 

decks in the Wyandotte house designs are well 

sheltered by a porch roof.

#2 Corner and banding trim boards

Trim boards are typically installed in direct contact 

with the sheathing. It is not clear that proper flashing 

details have been put in place to direct water over 

and away from the back side of the trim. Adding 

furring behind these trim boards would greatly 

decrease the risk of water damage. Another trimrelated issue is the provision of adequate blocking 

behind the insulating sheathing for trim attachment. 

This is being addressed by the framing crews.
27 

#3 Water table

Two issues are pictured here. The first (1) is that 

mechanical penetrations through this trim board are 

not properly flashed. The second (2) is that a 

regletted flashing must be installed over the trim 

board to direct water over and away from the small 

gap behind the trim board.

Figure 15. Common exterior finishing issues

5.7 Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning Installation

Installation of the ductwork on the first and second floors has been completed and finished. As 

specified, all ductwork joints and seals have been sealed with mastic (see Figure 15).

Figure 16. Typical duct sealing at boot and through interior partition top plate

5.8 Lighting and Appliances

A 100% CFL package and ENERGY STAR appliances have been specified for the NSP2 houses 

and these will be included in the final sale. 

2

1
28 

5.9 Sales and Marketing

The NSP2 houses were not marketed the way that typical production houses might be, although 

there were some common elements. The first houses completed for the program were used as 

open houses for public viewing, and the City of Wyandotte hired a real estate agency that posted 

the homes online (see Figure 18). 

To attract attention to the program, the City of Wyandotte used local media and announcements 

through city correspondence with residents. As a result, a significant number of potential buyers 

joined a waiting list before construction. 

Homeowners wishing to buy one of the NSP2 homes needed to qualify for the MSHDA lowincome requirements and then join a lottery with other interested buyers. The low-income 

screening was a requirement of the program. Qualified buyers would receive the house at a 

subsidized price as part of a long-term lease/ownership model that was designed to ensure 

affordability. Note that the lower operating costs expected for the NSP2 houses in the program 

was a fundamental part of the affordability strategy. 

Figure 17. Example real estate website listing for Wyandotte NSP2 house

5.10 Purchase Price

As of April 2012, several houses in the Wyandotte NSP2 program were complete and ready for 

sale to qualifying homeowners. The NSP2 focus area in Wyandotte has an average list price of 

$74,2485

. Table 10 shows that the total project costs for each house were significantly above the 

average sale price for other homes in the community. The average sale price, though, includes 

many smaller houses that would need significant renovation work. 

As part of the program, the list price for the NSP2 houses was reduced using a financing 

arrangement with MSHDA. Table 8 gives the list price for the houses ready for construction. 

 

5 Information from real estate listing site on April 3, 2012: www.trulia.com/property/3074663891-247-Walnut-StWyandotte-MI-48192
29 

Table 8. Construction Cost and List Price for Wyandotte NSP2 Homes

House Number Construction Cost List Price Description

Walnut 1 $190,000 $120,000 1,460 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Walnut 2 $199,000 $115,000 1,491 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Cora 5 $168,000 $128,000 1,443 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Cora 1 $172,000 $128,000 1,143 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Cora 2 $169,000 $118,000 1,463 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Vinewood 1 $192,000 $118,000 1,504 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Poplar 1 $210,000 $118,000 1,504 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

Poplar 2 $192,000 $113,000 1504 ft2, 3 bedroom, 2 bath

5.11 Homebuyer Education

A homeowner manual based on previous work by BSC was developed for this project and will 

be given to purchasers. 

BSC typically recommends making an introductory presentation on the operation of a high 

performance house. In this case a public presentation for home buyers and prospective home 

buyers would seem to be a good fit with the program goals. This session has not been scheduled 

and this topic will be discussed after houses have been prepared for sale. 
30 

6 Conclusions

6.1 Responses to Research Questions

The new construction projects discussed in this report will serve as examples of successful 

affordable, high performance homes that could be built in a cold-climate area similar to Detroit. 

The specifications that are recommended as part of this technology package show a clear 

improvement in energy efficiency, durability, and indoor air quality when compared to typical 

construction in the area. BSC’s energy modeling and field testing work shows an estimated 37% 

whole-house energy savings, and the Wyandotte NSP2 project has demonstrated that this level of 

performance is achievable in an affordable construction package. 

The following answers can be given to the project research questions: 

1. Does the proposed hybrid wall assembly meet expectations for whole building 

airtightness and construction efficiency? Yes, but there is room for improvement. The 

construction process and detailing of the assembly can both be adjusted as construction 

progresses. The preliminary blower door testing conducted on the first substantially 

complete house indicated that even as a first attempt by the builder, the BA airtightness 

target of 2.5-in.

2 leakage area per 100-ft2

 enclosure @ 50 Pa was achievable with the 

hybrid wall system. 

As construction progressed, trades and other project stakeholders (general contractors, building 

code officials, the project architect’s staff, and the city project manager) became more familiar 

with the common points of air leakage and changes were made to the drawings, scopes of work, 

and construction inspection. Well into the construction process, a whole-house airtightness of 

0.5-in.

2 leakage area per 100-ft2

 enclosure @ 50 Pa was consistently achievable.

Based on this experience, BSC recommends that the predrywall enclosure airtightness test be 

conducted following four construction steps: (1) the installation of the windows, (2) the 

installation of the window flashing; (3) the spraying of foam on the interior of walls and roofs; 

and (4) the integration with the foundation air barrier system. An advantage of the hybrid 

enclosure assembly is that the air barrier system is complete at this early stage of construction 

and testing and remedial work can be very effective at this time. BSC plans to develop a scope of 

work for this testing.

2. Can water management details for insulating sheathing be cost-effectively executed 

by the construction team? Yes. The water management details were part of the 

drawings and specifications included in the bid package and builders were not asked to 

price this work separately. Work on site to date has indicated that the details can be 

executed with reasonable speed and effectiveness given some initial training for the 

installers. Although areas for improvement were identified on several houses, the project 

team was able to correct these issues.

3. Does the total project cost fall within the project requirements and deliver higher 

than expected energy performance? Measured energy performance of the Wyandotte 

houses is not available for confirmation. BSC’s modeled results, however, show an 

estimated 37% whole-house energy savings over the BA benchmark. This is higher than 

expected.
31 

The project cost requirements are more difficult to assess. Table 10 in the previous section 

shows that the construction cost of the houses is much higher than the sale price. The final 

construction costs work out at between $115/ft2

 and $125/ft2. This is close, however, to the 

$120/ft2 cost that was planned from the beginning of the NSP2 project. Consequently, it should 

be considered an expected result. 

Further cost savings should be possible as construction of the remaining houses in the project 

continues. Certainly the GSHP system is an expensive line item (including wells, it represents 

about 10%–15% of the total construction cost). Less expensive options for heating and cooling 

could be employed on other projects. 

4. Is the sizing method for the GSHP accurate for small houses with high thermal 

resistance enclosures? Data from completed and occupied houses are not currently 

available. Equipment sizing calculations have shown, however, that the enclosure 

improvements should result in a decrease in the capacity that was expected. More 

information is needed to make a final determination. This question will need to be 

answered by future research work. 

5. Can the GSHP unit be reduced in size to accommodate additional homes on the 

same well? Based on load calculations using the relatively high levels of insulation, 

above-average windows, and the BA airtightness specification, it would seem possible to 

accommodate two small houses on a typical 6- to 8-ton well. The final as-built 

airtightness of the enclosure and the performance of the wells that have been installed, 

though, are major variables in this estimation. With some work, efforts to reduce the 

building heating and cooling loads can be increased. The progress that has been made on 

the houses constructed to date demonstrates that this is a real possibility. Wyandotte 

Municipal Services should measure the performance of the wells. In the future, 

Wyandotte Municipal Services intends to examine the possibility of linking wells 

together to form a district system. Low-load houses will be an asset if a district system is 

developed. 

6.2 Future Development for Higher Performance Levels

Specific challenges must be overcome to reach the estimated energy savings, including the 

following: 

• Achieving a coordinated approach between the architectural plans and the mechanical 

system design and installation

• Supporting multiple builders as they adjust to new construction techniques and new 

materials

• Implementing a quality control process based on performance testing and feedback for 

the builder, specifically in the areas of air sealing and cladding attachment

• Adjusting plans and specifications to incorporate solutions for issues observed on site, 

specifically involving framing and water management details

• Developing a plan for marketing to buyers and educating homeowners. 
32 

Many issues could change the specifications in these homes going forward. They include cost 

and budget concerns, requirements of other rating and certification programs, material 

availability, and labor experience. BSC will continue to work with the City of Wyandotte to 

make necessary changes to the improvements while maintaining the high standard of 

construction required by the BA program. 

6.3 Gaps in Existing Measure Guidelines

The following gaps were identified in existing measure guidelines:

• Quality management strategies. Wyandotte NSP2 is not a typical project in the way 

that the funding and project management is structured. As codes and standards change, 

however, it could become more common for local building departments, state housing 

authorities, or utility programs to specify a high performance housing product. For many 

of the strategies that are incorporated into construction similar to what has been built in 

Wyandotte, a quality management process is essential to achieving the estimated energy 

performance. Experience with the Wyandotte project suggests that this measure guideline 

should include local building departments, state housing authorities, and utility providers 

as part of the target audience.

• Wall air sealing and insulation methods. Insulating sheathing has been examined by 

many different BA research projects and has been found to be an effective way of 

achieving higher levels of enclosure insulation. Lack of information from manufacturers 

on the attachment of different cladding types over more than 1.5 in. of insulating 

sheathing, though, has created a limitation for the architect in the important task of 

developing designs that would fit well with neighboring houses. The information gap has 

also caused problems for trades installing cladding and trim. This is a clear example of 

the nonenergy-related practical challenges faced when deploying new energy efficient 

technology. Changing energy codes and consumer expectations for energy performance 

make it likely that the use of greater thicknesses of insulating sheathing in cold-climate 

homes will become more widespread. Guidance on this topic should be developed. 

6.4 Recommendations for Future Measure Guidelines

Based on the work completed in Wyandotte, the following measure guidelines would address 

key problems with performance or general knowledge: 

• GSHPs for Cold-Climate Homes. This technology is a popular choice for many builders 

in cold-climate locations. Information about the proper sizing and operation of these units 

is not available from BA in the form of a measure guideline. Additional research that 

includes longer term monitoring of installed systems in a number of situations would 

seem to be an important part of such a publication. 

• Heat Recovery Ventilation and Energy Recovery Ventilation Systems for Cold 

Climates. These systems are not being used in the Wyandotte NSP2 houses, but this 

technology was considered during the energy analysis phase and several builders in the 

program have asked about using these systems. Clear guidance from BA—particularly 
33 

about the effectiveness of both heat recovery ventilation and energy recovery ventilation 

systems in cold climates—is needed.

• Water Management Details for Insulating Sheathing. BSC is conducting research on 

this topic. Guidance on a number of specific details (including roof to wall, foundation to 

wall, and window installation, among others) was given to the Wyandotte team but this 

information should be gathered together as a measure guideline.
34 

7 References

ACCA (2011). Manual J Residential Load Calculation (8th Edition). Arlington, VA: Air 

Conditioning Contractors of America. 

ASHRAE (2010). 2010 ASHRAE Standard 62.2 – Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air 

Quality in Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.

Baker, P. (October 2006). RR-0604: Incorporating Insulating Sheathing into the Design of the 

Thermal and Moisture Management System of the Building Enclosure. BSC. Accessed January 

3, 2011: www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-0604-incorporating-insulatingsheathing-into-design-of-thermal-and-moisture-management-system-of-building-enclosure/. 

BSC (November 2010). RR-1004: 2010 Community Scale Evaluations. Accessed January 3, 

2011: https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-1004-ba-special-researchadvanced-framing-deployment/view?searchterm=rr-1004. 

BSC (February 2010). Designs that Work - Cold Climate: Habitat for Humanity High R-Value 

Prototype. BSC. Accessed January 3, 2011: www.buildingscience.com/documents/casestudies/cs-ma-westford-hfh/.

BSC (May 2009). Info-201: Common Advanced Framing Details. BSC. Accessed January 3, 

2011: http://www.buildingscience.com/documents/information-sheets/information-sheetcommon-advanced-framing-details

Lstiburek, J.; Lukachko, A. (December 2008). Plans for Energy Efficient Homes in Greensburg, 

KS. BSC. Accessed April 26, 2011: www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-0804-

energy-efficient-plans-greensburg-ks/

BSC (June 2008). Research Reports # 305: Why it’s So Important (and Troubling) to Keep Ducts 

and Equipment in Conditioned Space. Accessed May 15, 2011: 

www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-0305-why-it-s-so-important-and-troubling-tokeep-ducts-and-equipment-in-conditioned-space/view?searchterm=ducts. 

BSC (October 2007). Guide to Insulating Sheathing. Accessed January 3, 2011: 

www.buildingscience.com/documents/guides-and-manuals/gm-guide-insulating-sheathing/. 

BSC (August 1999). “Designs that Work—Cold Climate: Cleveland Infill Prototype House.” 

Accessed January 3, 2011: www.buildingscience.com/documents/case-studies/cs-clevelandinfill/. 

Hendron, R., R. Anderson, D. Barley, A. Rudd, A. Townsend, and E. Hancock. (October 2008). 

“Field Test of Room-to-Room Distribution of Outside Air with Two Residential Ventilation 

Systems.” Prepared for ASHRAE IAQ 2007, Baltimore, Maryland, October 15–17, 2007. 

NREL/CP-550-41210. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

ICC (2010). 2009 International Energy Conservation Code. Washington, DC: International Code 

Council, 2010. 
35 

Lstiburek, J. (2006). Builder’s Guide to Cold Climates. Westford, MA: Building Science Press. 

Lstiburek, J.; Grin, A. (December 2010). RR-1004: Building America Special Research 

Project—Advanced Framing Deployment. BSC. Accessed January 3, 2011: 

www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-1004-ba-special-research-advanced-framingdeployment/. 

Lukachko, A.; Bergey, D. (2010). Wyandotte NSP2 Cold Climate Commercially Viable Energy 

Efficiency Solution Package. BSC unpublished report. 

MSHDA (undated). “Michigan NSP Consortium Application Program Design.” Accessed May 

10, 2011: 

www.michigan.gov/documents/mshda/mshda_NSP2_Program__Design_posting_for_public_co

mment_284962_7.pdf. 

Rudd, A. (June 2008). RR-0304: Central Fan Integrated Supply Ventilation—The Basics. BSC. 

Accessed January 3, 2011: www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-0304-central-fanintegrated-supply-ventilation-the-basics/. 

Straube, J.; Smegal, J. (March 2009). RR-0903: Building America Special Research Project—

High-R Walls Case Study Analysis. BSC. Accessed January 3, 2011: 

https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-0903-building-america-special-researchproject-high-r-walls/. 

Ueno, K. (October 2001). Research Reports # 110: HVAC Equipment Sizing Strategies: Taking 

Advantage of High Performance Buildings. BSC. Accessed May 15, 2011: 

www.buildingscience.com/documents/reports/rr-0110-hvac-equipment-sizing-strategies-takingadvantage-of-high-performance-buildings/view?searchterm=right%20sizing. 

Ueno, K.; Straube, J. (2010). Building Science Digests: BSD-151: Understanding 

Primary/Source and Site Energy. BSC. Accessed October 14, 2012: 

www.buildingscience.com/documents/digests/bsd151-understanding-primary-source-site-energy.
36 

Appendix A: MSHDA Wyandotte, MI NSP2 Target Areas
37 

Appendix B: Wyandotte NSP2 Initial Energy Analysis 

(November 9, 2010)

TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT, AFFORDABLE

NSP2 HOUSING IN WYANDOTTE, MI – PRELIMINARY REPORT 

Alex Lukachko and Philip Kerrigan, Building Science Corporation 

November 9, 2010 

Introduction

In 2010, Building Science Corporation, through the Building America research program, assisted 

the City of Wyandotte with the first phase of a mixed new and retrofit affordable housing 

Neighborhood Stabilization Project 2 (NSP2) project in Michigan. Initial work included 

refinement of plans and specifications that were included in the preliminary bid package. The 

project, which is expected to extend into 2012, will include approximately 25 new houses and 19 

retrofits of existing homes in the downtown area. 

Project Information Summary Sheet

PROJECT SUMMARY

Company City of Wyandotte

Company Profile Incorporated in 1867, the City of Wyandotte is often described as the ‘Heart 

of Downriver.’ The site where Wyandotte sits today was, in the 1700s, a 

village for the Native American tribe known as the Wyandot, a part of the 

Huron Nation. A waterfront community, Wyandotte is rich in history and is 

known for its distinctive architecture, charming downtown district and 

variety of cultural offerings. The City has been awarded the designation of a 

Preserve America Community by the Federal Government.

Wyandotte Municipal Service Commission provides electricity, water, and 

telecommunication utilities for Wyandotte. This City owned utility was 

created in 1889.

More information about the City of Wyandotte can be found at 

www.wyandotte.net

Contact Information Mark A. Kowalewski, P.E., City Engineer 

City of Wyandotte

3131 Biddle Ave.

Wyandotte, MI 48192

Tel: (734) 324-4500

Division Name n/a

Company Type City - NSP2 recipient

Community Name Wyandotte NSP2

City, State Wyandotte, MI

Climate Region Cold, Climate Zone 5

SPECIFICATIONS

Number of Houses 25 new, 19 retrofit

Municipal Address(es) varies

House Style(s) Various single family homes

Number of Stories 1.5 stories typical

Number of Bedrooms 3 typical
38 

Plan Number(s) 247 Walnut

Floor Area 1475 sq ft

Basement Area ~600 sq ft

Estimated Energy Reduction Greater than 40% under BA Benchmark

Estimated Energy Savings More than $780 per year

Estimated Cost Target construction cost is $100 per sq ft

Construction Start Expected late 2010

Expected Buildout End of 2012

Preliminary Technical Support

In August, BSC worked with industry partner BASF and the City of Wyandotte to develop a 

technical specification for the new and existing houses in the planned project. The project 

architect working for the City prepared plans for the first 3 houses to be tendered. BSC provided 

initial advice on enclosure and mechanical systems, and planned to complete an energy analysis 

when the house plans were moved to a more developed stage. A major issue for the design team 

was the planned budget for each house. The architects worked with an estimator to establish 

baseline costing for proposed enclosure and mechanical system specifications. BASF worked 

with the City on material supply and pricing in an effort to provide more certainty on the 

material pricing. 

On September 22 and 23, BSC staff met with the City of Wyandotte and BASF. With the City, 

BSC discussed the systems engineering approach that will be employed on the new and retrofit 

plans being developed by the architect. BSC also presented the results of a preliminary energy 

analysis (see section below) based on as-is plans and specifications. BSC discussed deployment 

strategies for the planned high performance houses, which will include some element of 

information/education for trades bidding on the work for this project. This will be designed to 

broaden the understanding of high performance housing techniques in the local workforce. Plans 

for collecting utility bills from the completed houses were discussed and will be implemented by 

the City.

Following the meeting with the City, BSC and BASF met with the project architect and HERS 

provider. A brief review of the tender packages for the first three houses was conducted. Testing 

and inspection requirements were discussed with the HERS rater. 

On September 23rd, BSC and BASF met with the architect to review the plans in more detail. 

Technical specifications and details for air tightness, water management and thermal control 

were discussed. BSC and the architect then met with the engineering firm that will provide the 

district GSHP system for the city. Basic details of the system were discussed. BSC noted that 

significant technical support and monitoring may be required for this system - possibly a 

research interest for NREL researchers. More information on equipment sizing, DHW, 

ventilation, and ducting will be collected from the HVAC installer hired for this project at a 

future meeting. 

A visit to several of the proposed project sites was made at the end of the day. BSC observed that 

the sites are well distributed in a lively neighborhood and will be excellent examples of 

neighborhood development. 
39 

Preliminary Whole-House Performance and Systems Engineering

The following is a preliminary energy analysis of one of the new house plans developed for the 

project. The reader should note that at the time of this analysis, not all energy efficient upgrades 

to the original specifications were agreed upon and implemented. While the preliminary analysis 

shows a significant energy savings, the project team expects that additional savings will be 

realized as the project develops. 

The 247 Walnut floor plan is a two story detached house with a full conditioned basement. Table 

9 below lists some of the basic dimensions and areas that were calculated through a plan takeoff. 

Some dimensions (such as floor area) may be different than what is listed in the drawing set due 

to our takeoff procedures. 

Table 9. Basic Dimensions and Areas for 247 Walnut

Whole house hourly energy consumption simulations were completed calculating the source 

energy consumption savings for 247 Walnut compared to the 2010 Building America Benchmark 

Definition created by the Department of Energy. The Building America Benchmark is a protocol 

for creating a reference house to which the target floor plan (247 Walnut, in this case) is 

compared to in order to calculate a % savings. The BA Benchmark specifies a home with similar 

dimensions vs. the target floor plan but with standard code specifications that are based on the 

2003 IECC.6 Other assumptions are built into the definition (lighting, appliances etc) so a 

complete model of the entire house can be created. This provides an energy “baseline” that 

allows a percent savings to be calculated for Building America homes using our computerized 

models (Energy Gauge USA). 

Whole house hourly energy consumption simulations were also completed vs. the 2009. 

Table 10 summarizes the characteristics for each of the three categories. In some cases BSC had 

to make some assumptions, those are noted in the table. 

 

6 See www.energycodes.gov/ for more information.

Floor area Surface Area Volume Beds Baths Glazing

(sf) (sf) (cf) (ct) (ct) Ratio

1475 4077 24969 3 2.0 24.8%
40 

Table 10. Building Energy Specifications

Table 11 below outlines the calculated energy savings for 247 Walnut for both comparisons. The 

house saves 39.1% vs. the Benchmark. The predicted HERS Index is also listed for each 

configuration. The floor plan with the current specifications receives a HERS Index of 75, 

compared to the 70 or lower that is needed to be Builder’s Challenge certified. 

Table 11. Simulation Results for 247 Walnut

The total annual energy costs were predicted using local utility rates:

Wyandotte Municipal Services ~$0.09/kWh Residential Rate

Figure 19 is a bar graph that shows the whole house source energy use broken down into 

components. Energy consumption for heating was reduced the most. This is due to the enclosure 

upgrades along with the ground source heat pump. 

Description of change % savings

Annual energy 

cost Savings HERS Index

2010 BA Benchmark n/a $2,342 n/a 111.0

Current Builder Specifications 39.1% $1,560 $782 75.0

2009 IECC n/a $2,251 n/a 102.0

Current Builder Specifications 30.7% $1,560 $692 75.0
41 

Figure 18. 247 Walnut Parametric Results Graph

Preliminary Conclusions

The NSP2 project of the City of Wyandotte has good potential to achieve affordable high energy 

savings for new and existing homes. The preliminary plans developed by the project architect 

show excellent attention to building science detail and a significant amount of work has been 

done to integrate energy efficiency and durability measure into the buildings while maintaining 

the aggressive construction cost target set by the City. BSC anticipates that additional energy 

savings will be secured as subsequent plan sets are developed. 

The City of Wyandotte has proposed a long-term plan to create a district ground source heat 

pump (DGSHP) service run by the City-owned utility company. The initial stage of this plan will 

be for each of the NSP2 houses to be equipped with a single well drilled in the boulevard in front 

of the house. Initially, the wells will provide heating, cooling and domestic hot water for the 

homes. In the long term, these wells will be linked to form the source/sink for the district system. 

The efficiency of each of the new and existing houses in the project will in part determine the 

additional capacity of the DGSHP system that can be sold to residents that were not part of the 

initial NSP2 program. The energy efficiency goals of the housing project therefore are 

fundamentally connected to the long-term viability of the DGSHP project, creating a further 

reason to anticipate additional energy savings.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Million Btu/year (source energy)

Other Lighting Hot Water Cooling Heating
42 

Appendix C: Site Visit Reports

2011-06-08 Wyandotte Site Visit Report 

2011-06-28 Wyandotte Site Visit Report (included presentation attendance list and slides) 

2011-08-22 Wyandotte Site Visit Report 

2011-10-06 Wyandotte Site Visit Report (included presentation attendance list and slides) 

2011-11-28 SNAPSHOT form for Walnut 1 

2011-11-28 SNAPSHOT form for Walnut 2 
43 

Appendix D: Project Team Contact Information

Table 12. Industry Team Member Contact Information

Company Name Team Member Email Phone

City of Wyandotte Ralph Hope, project 

manager rhope@wyan.org 734-324-4525 

City of Wyandotte Mark Kowalewski, 

chief city engineer mkowalewski@wyan.org 734-324-4554 

Sarnacki & 

Associates 

Architects

John “Jay” Sarnacki, 

AIA jsarnacki@sarnackiaia.com 734-282-3900 

Sarnacki & 

Associates 

Architects

Dan Boggs dboggs@sarnackiaia.com 734-282-3900 

Hardin 

Geothermal Dave Congdon dcongdon@hardingeo.com 734-890-1889 

Cappy Heating 

and Air 

Conditioning

Jeff Caplan jeff@cappyheating.com 313-218-2846 

Building Science 

Corporation Alex Lukachko alex@buildingscience.com 978-589-5100 

Building Science 

Corporation Daniel Bergey daniel@buildingscience.com 978-589-5100 

Building Science 

Corporation Aaron Grin agrin@buildingscience.com 978-589-5100 

Warm Training 

Center Stephen Christensen schristensen@warmtraining.com 313-418-5419 

BASF Paul Campbell paul.w.campbell@basf.com 704-587-8283

BASF Aaron Davenport aaron.davenport@basf.com 980-207-8192
Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing at 

least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post-consumer waste.

DOE/GO-102013-3634 · January 2013