Attendees
Sean Parker
Walt Kanzler
Josh Dean
Ken Hall
Spencer Lee
Leanne Kao
Selina Yip
Harley Crace
Colin Moynihan
Recommendations from group online survey and meeting discussion
Move forward with Gold minimum recommendations for all projects above $5M.
Any circumstances that prevent Gold from being met, provide a justification letter for Silver.
...
O+M to be mentioned in policy
...
with requirements of project teams going through LEED scorecard (with or without certification).
...
Provide utility baseline of current LEED projects to set matrix or formula for projects under $5M.
...
Pilot projects section to be mentioned in policy to begin recommendations of WELL, FitWell, LBC, Parksmart, etc. (Not mandated) Those pilots will be based on stakeholder engagement and budgetary constraints.
...
Concerns around life cycle cost (cost of maintenance) and needing language to point back to master spec (review what we know doesn’t work for UCSD). Consistently replacing materials (even green materials) is not truly sustainable ownership.
...
Re-evaluate who is involved with sustainability on campus. Revamp their roles and create recurring forum to manage policy and stakeholder outreach.
...
Bi-annual survey of completed projects, include students; may use ARC system?
Update policy every 5 years.
...
Discussion
Incorporation of Operations & Maintenance in Policy
O+M quite broad (in practices); considering costs with relation to situations on campus, it may be more worthwhile to focus more on initial design and leave O+M maintenance to current practices (i.e. Green Labs)
Worthwhile to look at broad metrics and see how they add up to meet our goals
Generally good to have some specifications on what has to be done in O+M in order to keep a sustainably designed building sustainable through its working lifetime
Interval for policy updates
Every 5 years likely the best choice; UCOP looks every year as well, and determines whether an update needs to be considered
Should LEED Gold be the minimum?
Could be a 2-tier system where capital projects in particular are given LEED Gold requirement
Smaller projects with more constrained budgets should be given more leeway
UCOP: LEED Silver is minimum, but should strive for Gold; must give some justification as to why Gold was not attainable, changing the mindset of only needing to get to LEED Silver vs. actually striving for Gold
Need to set boundaries for what makes Gold “too expensive” and who makes that justification
Can at least give data on what constraints projects experience in shooting towards greater sustainability
Will have Clark’s information on their portfolio with regards to higher-education buildings, and their cost/LEED certification
Types of projects to meet minimum
Should stakeholders be engaged with regards to what their goals are on sustainability?
Healthcare-type projects would get some leeway for their stricter building standards
Anything below $5 million as of now don’t have many requirements on them; we must determine if that group of projects moves the dial enough towards campus goals
Can use LEED rating systems to find best practices for those smaller building projects to implement
Can create a matrix of points or codes on the LEED scorecard for projects at different levels to meet, with reference to the Harvard standards
O+M gets costly because desired renovations don’t get the same kick-off funding as new construction projects
Harley Crace has a project manager with an extensive LEED background who can consider things with regards to UCSD projects; Walt will be working with Michelle and Steve to talk on specific goals to report to VC Matthews
Maybe acute care facilities are exempt, but clinic should be able to meet LEED standards
Incorporating recommendations other than LEED
Seems to be majority vote for WELL, with LBC as a close second
Perhaps we introduce the other building standards in pilots, and then implement them into policy after department and their project managers have grown more comfortable with them
LBC is factually harder to achieve, in perspective to cost and regulations; maybe we mix in specific petals to consider for best practices
WELL may be good for spotlight projects, where FitWel may work well for dorms
Since FitWel is not 3rd-party verified, it may be harder to implement
Concerns to Address
Budget has more of a balancing piece; cost is more focused on raw cost
Consider: Google and Microsoft have their own red-lists for materials; on our end, maybe we focus on specific materials and practice towards durability in operations
How do we incorporate materials/practices without impacting schedule and cost?
FM currently has a Master Spec that does a good job outlining what materials project designers can use; any designs made outside the Master Spec must follow up with FM
UC San Diego seems to be shifting towards market rate model, which will affect the various departments; however, whatever extra costs incurred will be invested back into the campus for any tech needed to keep the campus up to date or cutting edge
More advanced building systems are growing to be harder to maintain; need to make intelligent decisions and consider what extra training or outside resources will be necessary for maintenance (such things incur extra costs)
Other recommendations
Need a solid piece, like a program schedule with milestones, to make sure these guidelines are being followed
Must consider what resources we have to provide more efforts necessary to implement practices which will be written into the guidelines
Having a more concrete group to follow -up with the policy and contact stakeholders (should have a larger team working on Sustainability)
Current plan is to revamp advisory committee for sustainability on campus, a network of sustainability managers from different departments on Campus
Evaluating the success of a completed project
Biggest split between who should lead the evaluation: students (such as in a LEED class), or a bi-annual department-level survey
Arc from LEED seems to be a good resource for surveying building performance, may be a worthwhile way to incorporate student participation
Things to look into
UCSD’s cost analysis of pursuing O+M certification, and the cost in relation to focusing more on initial building design
General cost differentials between LEED Silver, LEED Gold, and LEED Platinum
Arc as a way to survey building performance
Survey Results
Form responses
7 Slides with noteworthy responses
Should O and M be included 90% Yes 10% No
A difference between policy and guidelines needs to be established
Concerns with O+M
Old UCSD Research on Labs and Mixed builds says O+M not worth (Spencer) (Send in confluence)
Strategic energy savings
Existing work on saving energy (Flux?) [IQ]
O+M an important part of future policy
O+M metrics and requirements
Including O+M within the policy allows for written
Policy Update interval
5 year majority vote
10 year votes
No votes for no review
LEED Gold as minimum
Yes as 2/3rds
1/3rd as no
Reasons for potential split
Concern for smaller capital projects on meeting policy
If stating Gold is minimum, could allow for unable buildings to meet silver to follow UCOP policy as an exception
Needs to address buildings that are somewhat exceptional
Cost differential?
Talking to Gary? [INFO]
Again on building types, but analysis to be left to project teams?
Types of project to meet minimum?
40% all project over 5m (current UC system major renovation threshold)
40% projects at a certain scale (sqft 5000 or higher)
Requiring stakeholder engagement to find out what this scale is
Proposed system of measurement for non 5m+ projects (D1)
Larger projects require more points
16% other proposed scales
Exceptions for Health
Leed plat should be minimum
Do we look at all LEED systems for Gold minimum? (GQ)
Minimum is with regards to new buildings
Option 1, 5m is with regards to renovation
Checking out the Harvard standard to determine the minimum level for projects.
Certifications other than LEED
WELL majority vote
25% living building
Could indicate costliness, but incorporating points rather than levels?
Low goal of only a few petals? AS pilot
FitWell for dorms?
Fitwell on marquee projects, LBC if budget allows
True on pilot building
ParkSmart as standard
LEED O+M for all
WELL and Living Building Challenge
WELL and Parksmart
Concerns to address?
Stakeholder Concerns
Operable windows
Lighting
HDH Gas to electricity
Concerns with Rate hikes on campus
Maintainability
Lifecycle costs
Ensuring that technologies used are capable of being maintained by existing workforce
Hurdles towards implementation
Materials redlist?
How to determine what is placed on this list?
Avoiding sustainable materials that may not be cost effective to be continually replacing something.
Similar to Low VOC paints [IQ]
Similar to California Prop P65?
Other recommendations
Need a Program schedule with milestones
Partner for collection and re-use of salvaged building materials
“Facility could also serve as demonstration/ test facility for evaluating “green” building products and materials
Well in addition to LEED, not as a replacement
Need a more robust sustainability team
Would like to have assigned members to the policy update question
Evaluating success of a completed project
Bi-annual survey of recent projects
Student lead research of the completed building and its occupants