Achieving a LEED Gold Laboratory @ UCSF

1,670 views

Published on

How we achieved a LEED Gold laboratory remodel without adding to the proejct cost or compromising the scientific mission.

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Achieving a LEED Gold Laboratory @ UCSF

  1. 1. UCSF HSE5 CENTER FOR BIOENGINEERING AND T I S S U E R E G E N E R AT I O N
  2. 2. UCSF HSE5 LEED COMMERCIAL INTERIORS 2.0 G O L D 2 0 11
  3. 3. AGENDA1 Project Overview2 LEED Charrette and Planning3 Design and Implementation4 Documentation and Coordination5 LEED Submittal Process6 Project Summary
  4. 4. PROJECT OVERVIEW 1
  5. 5. HSE5: Center for Bioengineering and TissueRegeneration4800 sf interior laboratory renovationProgramOpen LaboratoryMicroscopy RoomsTissue Culture RoomsBiomaterial Development Room with Fume HoodEquipment RoomsCopy RoomBreak RoomOffices 1Data and Electrical(Microsurgery)
  6. 6. 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
  7. 7. 1 PROJECT OVERVIEWReception/Break Room
  8. 8. 1 PROJECT OVERVIEWOpen Laboratory
  9. 9. 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
  10. 10. LEED CHARRETTE 2
  11. 11. 2 LEED CHARRETTEWHAT IS A LEED CHARRETTE? A charrette is an intensive, one or two-day collaborative session where building stakeholders and building experts address particular design or project issues. The goal is to generate possible design solutions and strategies to kick-off LEED implementation.
  12. 12. 2 LEED CHARRETTEPREPARATION1 Review similar LEED projects2 Review CIRS for potential innovation credits3 Update LEED ChecklistMEETING1 Review all credits2 Discuss strategies and potential problems3 Assign responsibility
  13. 13. 2 LEED CHARRETTESustainable Sites (4) CREDITS
  14. 14. 2 LEED CHARRETTEMaterials and Resources (6) CREDITS
  15. 15. 2 LEED CHARRETTEWater Efficiency and Energy and Atmosphere (0) CREDITS (4) CREDITS
  16. 16. 2 LEED CHARRETTEIndoor Environmental Quality (15) CREDITS
  17. 17. 2 LEED CHARRETTEIndoor Environmental Quality (3) CREDITS
  18. 18. 2 LEED CHARRETTE
  19. 19. D E S I G N A N D I M P L E M E N TAT I O N 3
  20. 20. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONExisting ConditionsSustainable MaterialResearchSpecificationsSystem Performance ARCHITECT CONTRACTORDaylight and View Studies
  21. 21. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONLEED Credits at UCSFAccess to PublicTransportation (SS 3.1, ID1.1)Development Density (SS2)Green Cleaning (SS 1L) ARCHITECTAlternativeTransportation, Parkingavailability (SS 3.3)Tenant Space, Long TermCommitment (MR 1.1)
  22. 22. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONLow VOC and Recycled ContentLow VOC emittingadhesives andsealants, paints, carpets, and composite wood (IEQ 4.1-4.4)FSC certified wood (MR 7) ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR21.65% Recycled Content(MR 4.1-4.2)Divert 81.73% of wastefrom landfills (MR 2.1-2.2)
  23. 23. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONDaylighting100 % Daylighting ofregularly occupied spaces(IEQ 8.1-8.2)100% Access to views inall non-light sensitivespaces(IEQ 8.3) CONTRACTORDevelopment of indoor airquality management planduring construction andbefore occupancy (IEQ3.1-3.2)
  24. 24. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONMechanical SystemsVentilation systemmonitoring (IEQ1)Isolated copy room with200 CFM exhaust and newMERV 13 filters prior tooccupancy (EQ5)Comply with ASHRAE 55-2004 – thermal comfortcontrol and monitoring CONTRACTOR(IEQ 7.1-7.2)Outdoor air ventilationrates at breathing zone30% above minimum ratesrequired by ASHRAE 62.1-2004 (IEQ 2)
  25. 25. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONEnergyReduction in lighting powerdensity to 15% belowANSIASHRAE/IESNA90.1-2004 (EA 1.1)Daylight responsivecontrols installed in allregularly occupied spaces CONTRACTOR(EA 1.2)Increase levels of energyconservation through useof zoning and controls ofHVAC system. (EA 1.3A)
  26. 26. 3 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONFundamental andenhanced commissioningmeasures(EA 2)Conduct fume hoodcommissioning includingASHRAE-110 method for CONTRACTORtesting performance ofLaboratory Fume Hoodsand alarm system. (ID 1.3)
  27. 27. D O C U M E N TAT I O N A N D C O O R D I N AT I O N 4
  28. 28. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATIONCOORDINATION Make sure credits are on MEP track. Be aware of credits that require specific submittal information (pictures during construction, ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR receipts, certifications, etc) Verify that specifications contain current LEED requirements for credits OWNER
  29. 29. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  30. 30. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  31. 31. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  32. 32. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  33. 33. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  34. 34. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  35. 35. 4 DOCUMENTATION AND COORDINATION
  36. 36. L E E D S U B M I T TA L P R O C E S S 5
  37. 37. 5 LEED SUBMITTAL PROCESS DESIGN DESIGN DESIGN REVIEW APPEAL ACCEPT SUBMITTAL RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS $500/CREDIT CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTAL REVIEW RESUBMITTAL APPEAL ACCEPT COMMENTS
  38. 38. PROJECT SUMMARY 6
  39. 39. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYCREDIT RESUBMIT AWARDED APPE AWARDED TAL ALSS 1L – Green Cleaning O O OSS 3.2 – Bicycle StorageWE 1.1 – Water Use Reduction OEAP P2 – Minimum Energy O OPerformanceIEQ 1.1 – Optimize Energy Lighting O OPowerIEQ 1.3A – Optimize Energy - HVAC O OIEQ 1 – Outside Air Delivery Monitoring O O OIEQ 6.2 – Controllability of Systems OTemp and Vent (Sent E-mail)ID 1.2 – Green CleaningCredits with review comments 9Credits Awarded 5Appeals 2Appeals Awarded 2
  40. 40. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsSS 1D – Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof Action The LEED Submittal Template has been provided Move Green stating that the building site has 87.35% Cleaning underground or covered parking. A minimum of 50% from ID to is required. The calculation, aerial photo, letter SS1 for ½ describing the parking, and a narrative provided credit for full support these claims. credit One half point is anticipated. Please note that two half points must be achieved to earn one full point. 6
  41. 41. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsID 1.2 – Innovation in Design Green Cleaning Action The green cleaning strategy applies to the entire Pursue campus. Therefore, the strategy is applicable to credit SSc1 instead of IDc1. through SS1L Provide a narrative demonstrating that the Green Cleaning Program not applicable to the entire building or campus. Alternatively, the Project Team may pursue credit through SSc1. 6
  42. 42. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review AppealSS 1L – Green Cleaning Action This strategy is applied to the entire building, and it Appeal for $500. is an acceptable strategy for an SSc1 half point. Include letter However, documentation identifying the date and regarding date activities associated with floor maintenance has not and activities been provided as required. One half point denied. associated with floor NOTE: maintenance. For future project please provide the LEED Submittal Template of the applied rating system and credit. 6 Result Awarded after appeal
  43. 43. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Result - AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDSS 1L Green Cleaning1. Green cleaning is an ID credit when the project is proposing a new green cleaning strategy for the entire campus. Adopting an existing green cleaning strategy does not warrant an ID credit.2. If the credit is not an innovation and addressed in another resource guide, it can be documented in SS1L for ½ credit.3. Credit under SS1L should be documented with the submittal information requested from the pertinent rating system and not the ID credit.
  44. 44. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsSS 3.2 – Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms Action The bike racks identified in the provided Do not documentation appear to be for the entire campus. attempt However, the calculations are based on project credit occupancy. Verify all The calculations indicate occupancy for the project credits use (22) that is inconsistent with WEc1.1(25). All the same occupancy numbers must be reported consistently occupancy across all LEED credit submittals. 6 The provided letter states that employees are required to pay a monthly fee to have access to showers. The LEED-CI Reference Guide states that access to a health and fitness club, provided within the lease agreement, on the property in which the Result project is located meets the credit intent a long as Credit not Attempted there is unlimited free access to the showering facilities for the tenants.
  45. 45. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign ReviewBest Practices for LEEDSS3.2 Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms1. Existing bicycle storage must be specific to project to earn this credit. Bicycle storage cannot be shared.2. Verify occupancy is consistent through all credits3. Shower and changing rooms must be free of charge
  46. 46. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsWE1.1 – Water Use Reduction Action All occupancy numbers must be reported Confirm consistently across all LEED credit submittals. occupancy Unless special conditions exist, projects should Include assume a 50 / 50 male / female ratio and an visitors in average of three fixture uses per day. Include calculation visitors and transient occupants. Include The water use calculations do not include all of the existing required EPAct fixtures (faucets, water closets, fixtures used 6 showers, and urinals). The project must document by the EPAct fixtures used by the occupants even if occupants they are not included in the project scope of work. outside project The water use calculations include process water boundary consuming fixtures which are not included in the EPAct.
  47. 47. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review ResubmittalWE1.1 – Water Use Reduction Action The water use calculations include process water Inefficient (E) consuming fixtures which are not included in the fixtures outweigh EPAct and should not be included in this calculation. number of (N) efficient fixtures. Do not attempt credit appeal. 6 Result Credit not Attempted
  48. 48. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Submittal – NOT ATTEMPTEDBest Practices for LEEDWE 1.1 – Water use Reduction1. Include all existing fixtures used by occupants in the calculation2. Do not include process water fixtures in the calculation.3. An innovation credit may be attempted by using water efficient process water fixtures. However, this may need to be applied to the entire building. See CIR.
  49. 49. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsEA 1.1 – Optimize Energy Performance – Lighting ActionPower Provide The LEED Submittal Template has been provided additional stating a 16.72% reduction in connected lighting narrative. power density, using the space-by-space method, Task light over that allowed by ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1- fixtures are 2004. The ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004 furniture Users Manual, Lighting Compliance Documentation mounted and and calculations have been provided. However, it is not included unclear if task lighting has been included. per ASHRAE 90.1-2004 6 Please provide a narrative with a brief description of Addendum task lighting. Provide a Revised LEED Submittal M. Template and Lighting Compliance Documentation as appropriate. Result Awarded
  50. 50. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Submittal – AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDEA 1.1 – Optimize Energy Performance –Lighting Power1. Make sure that items included in the calculations is clear2. If leaving certain elements out of the calculation, explain reasoning.
  51. 51. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsEA 1.3 – Optimize Energy Performance - HVAC Action Plans do not show sensors or controls capable of Provide sensing space use and modulating the HVAC additional system in response to space demand in private narrative and offices and specialty occupancy areas. Please note drawings of that thermostats are not sufficient to meet credit sensors and requirements. system. Please provide a narrative and plans demonstrating that private offices and specialty occupancy areas have controls capable of sensing space use and 6 modulating the HVAC system in response to space demand. Result Awarded
  52. 52. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Resubmittal - AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDEA 1.3 – Optimize Energy Performance -HVAC1. Be as clear as possible. Verify all pertaining documents are in the submittal2. Explain purpose of each sheet in narrative form.3. Call out items on sheet when possible
  53. 53. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review CommentsEA P2 – Minimum Energy Performance Action The LEED Submittal Template and Title 24 Report Provide have been provided stating that the project complies additional with California Title 24-2001. However, the project narrative was registered after Jun 26, 2007 and has not stating earned the two required points in EAc1. California Title 24 2001 is more stringent than Standard 6 90.1-2004 Result Awarded
  54. 54. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Resubmittal - AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDEA P2 – Minimum Energy Performance1. Do not assume that the LEED reviewer knows which standards are more stringent.2. Be clear and provide documentation using the same language used in the reference guide.
  55. 55. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Comments and ResubmittalEQ 1 – Outside Air Delivery Monitoring Action It is not clear if outdoor airflow measurement devices Provide are capable of measuring the minimum outdoor additional airflow rate at all expected system operating narrative conditions within 15% of the design minimum describing outdoor air rate. the system in place It does not appear that the outdoor airflow monitors are configured to generate an alarm if the indicated outdoor airflow rate drops more than 10% below the minimum outdoor air rate required by Standard 62.1 2004. 6 The requirements for densely occupied spaces do not appear to have been addressed.
  56. 56. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign AppealEQ 1 – Outside Air Delivery Monitoring Action The provided documentation does not address the Appeal for $500. c ability of the airflow measurement devices to Show HSE5 measure the minimum outdoor airflow rate within does not have 15% of the design minimum outdoor air rate at all any densely expected system operating conditions. occupied spaces In addition, the documentation does not address the Provide requirements for densely occupied spaces. The c additional documentation does not demonstrate credit narrative compliance. addressing 6 minimum outdoor airflow rate Provide cut Result sheet of system Awarded after appeal
  57. 57. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Appeal- AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDEQ 1 – Outside Air Delivery Monitoring1. Verify that you have addressed all submittal requirements2. Reply using the same language used by LEED and the reference guide.
  58. 58. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Comments and ResubmittalEQ 6.1 – Controllability of Systems, Lighting Action The number of occupants enabled to make Provide adjustments to suit individual task needs and narrative preferences is unclear. Additionally, it is not clear if describing occupants in multi-occupant spaces have the ability occupant to adjust lighting to suit their activities. and lighting control in Provide a narrative describing the lighting controls each room enabling occupants to make adjustments to suit individual task needs and preferences. Provide calculations demonstrating that at least 90% of 6 occupants have these controls. In addition, for all shared multi-occupant spaces, describe the activities and types of lighting controls available to the occupants demonstrating that lighting controls provide activity functionality.
  59. 59. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Resubmittal - AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDEQ 6.1 – Controllability of Systems, Lighting1. Provide more than plans for reference - Be clear and spell it out for your reviewer
  60. 60. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Comments and ResubmittalEQ 6.2 – Controllability of Systems, Temperature and ActionVentilation The documentation does not demonstrate that at Provide least 50% of the space occupants have the ability to narrative make adjustments to suit individual needs and stating all preferences. To satisfy this portion of the rooms have requirement, all open plan workstations, private own offices, and reception stations must be included in thermostat the count. Confirm that 50% or more of individuals and multi- occupying these locations have at least one means occupant of individual control over thermal comfort. open lab has 6 (2) Provide documentation, such as narrative and plans thermostats to demonstrate that at least 50% of occupants are provided with temperature and ventilation adjustments.
  61. 61. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review AppealEQ 6.2 – Controllability of Systems, Temperature and ActionVentilation A narrative has been provided stating that all rooms E-mail have their own thermostat and that the open lab has USGBC for two thermostats. This credit requires that 50% of the potential occupants must have the ability to make review error. adjustments to suit individual needs and Do not preferences. appeal. Lab is a The narrative provided with IEQc6.1 states that multi- there are 20 occupants in the open lab. Thus, at occupant 6 least 18 of the 25 project occupants do not have the space that ability to make adjustments to suit individual needs requires only and preferences. The documentation does not (1) demonstrate credit compliance. thermostat Result Not Awarded
  62. 62. 6 PROJECT SUMMARYDesign Review Appeal Email – NOT AWARDEDBest Practices for LEEDEQ 6.2 – Controllability of Systems,Temperature and Ventilation Open lab is not considered a shared multi-occupant space. Page 347 of the Reference guide defines it as “a place of congregation for functions such as presentations and training.” (ie. Conference rooms, break rooms, lecture halls.) Each workstation requires its own temperature control
  63. 63. FINAL THOUGHTSBE CLEAREXPLAIN RELAVANCE OF SHEET IN NARRATIVE FORMUSE LANGUAGE OF THE LEED REFERENCE GUIDECHECK ALL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTSVERIFY CONSISTENCY THROUGH ALL CREDITS
  64. 64. T H E D E S I G N PA R T N E R S H I P ARCHITECTS + PLANNERS www.dpsf.com

×