The lessons learned from this case can be divided by process and building systems. The Merrill Center can be considered as an excellent example of green buildings. But it is found that the actual performance is less than expected design because of different factors.

 

 ​

• The building delivery process is dynamic and moving forward. During the design process, though lots of simulations were conducted to predict operation performance, impacts of construction decisions and occupancy loads should be evaluated throughout the whole building lifecycle.

• Daylighting systems: As mentioned above, the south wall has more glazing than necessary for daylighting and causes glare problems on the second floor. Hanging translucent shades or exterior shading devices can be designed to minimize the glare.

• HVAC systems: Energy recovery ventilators are not always effective. The desiccant system is not used because of the need to operate a boiler in the summer. So the integrated control for innovative systems should be carefully thought out and refined once the building is occupied.

• In this case, the design and commission processes were conducted by the same party (Smith Group). Nowadays, the commissioning should be done by third party agents, in order to make sure the building built and operated according to the plan.

• The real time data of the building performance should be displayed and monitored to public. The center is not only a commercial office, but also a ‘green building’ model with educational meaning. The analysis of performance data could support to improve technology to enhance efficiency. On the other hand, planning the data monitoring system from the outset and integrating it with the building mechanization systems would have reduced costs and expanded opportunities. Therefore, the post-occupancy evaluation is with significant importance.

• The Merrill Center is a dynamic environment, and the design and planning should be adaptable to the changing social and ecological demands.​