6/13/19 Metrics and LCCA Meeting notes

Date

Jun 10, 2019

Participants

• Michelle Perez

• Sara McKinstry

• Kate Phin

• Valerie Fanning

• Curtz Lutz

• Pat Hochstein

• Lauren (Kahal) Lievers

• Rich Cota

• Diana Henderson

• Walt Kanzler

Action items

Decisions

1. Require LCCA for all projects over $5M that include certain systems (like mechanical)
2. Include % space utilization in metrics

Agenda

• Roadmap to Sustainable Building Policy/Guidelines (10 minutes)

• Current metrics (energy use/SF):

  • Energy CAP Dashboards

  • fPI graphing

  • Energy Reports

  • How do we track performance? To itself and/or against UCOP or peer benchmark? (10 minutes)

• New metrics (lb-waste/sf; gal-water/sf, O+M costs/SF, satisfaction %); to implement via Energy Cap (10 minutes)

• LCCA: Review Survey Results (20 minutes), follow up on Harvard tool

  • Results of Metrics and LCCA WG Survey (June 2019)

• To include or not include embodied carbon? (10 minutes)

• Next Steps

Discussion

Open

• Socialization: outreach, get the word out to get community feedback and consensus building across campus before go through formal policy process. Take place of summer and early fall.

  • Piggyback on campus transformation town halls. Separate town hall for current designers on projects already working.

  • Doing our own virtual town hall based on Transportation’s model.

  • Attending and presenting at existing meetings DRB, Open Space, CCPC, etc. Might reach to members of this working group if you are part of any of these meetings to help us present and get feedback.

  • Doing pop-up events, esp to reach students. Follow Planning’s model.

  • Charrette: share community feedback, policy and guidelines to date

  • In-person training when guidelines are done.

  • Content:

    • High-level policy changes coming and why we are doing this.

    • Still deciding how “meaty” and stringent want policy and what put in implementation guidelines instead. E.g. Min is LEED Gold and if can’t meet Gold, describe why and meet Silver. Piloting new rating systems like LBC, ParkSmart, WELL and FitWel.

    • Requirement for LCCA.

    • If below a certain dollar amount, describe sustainable criteria met.

    • Real Estate and P3: language that they can include in contracts. Could be tiered levels by size of company with UCSD help and awareness building for small, local businesses.

• Current metrics (energy use/SF):

  • Energy CAP Dashboards: coming in late June 2019. On FM Blink website. Chilled water, hot water, electric, potable water. Some submeters showing irrigation if they exist. Goes back to 2017. Moving towards more info by building with 15-minute interval data from previous day. If building has more than one meter, can’t do total interval look yet. By meter. Will be working with EnergyCAP to consolidate submeters to one view – where we are going. Can use dashboards to see spikes and see how compare to building design and peer buildings. Develop benchmarks for each of the building categories, including water.

  • Johnson controls fPI graphing. Smart buildings: look at what currently using and what should be using based on temperature, day of week and time of day. Can set notifications when a building falls out of norm by 15%. On NSB now but want to push across buildings with meters. Just for Energy & Utilities team.

  • Energy Reports

• How do we track performance? To itself and/or against UCOP or peer benchmark?

  • Working group says to do both: use existing building stock to compare against itself and use UCOP EUI targets.

• New metrics to implement via Energy Cap (10 minutes):

  • lb-waste/sf: (Also have to track lbs/weighted campus user for STARS and UCOP). Trying to get on the building level so can add to EnergyCAP dashboards.

  • Water use intensity by building types: gal-water/sf. (Still have to track potable water gal/WCU for STARS and UCOP until UCOP policy is changed. Proposing UC policy change by 2020.)

  • O+M costs/SF based on type of building. Includes labor, parts, materials, etc. Can compare to LCCA model for a project. FM close to getting down to the equipment level: track by assests not building location. HDH has asked to do this too but ESR system is getting rid of indexes so hard to get granular data. Wendy in FM working on this. ESYS student interested in working on this.

  • Satisfaction %: Surveys of occupants as a first go around. Could we use ARC for health/wellness data and commuting data? Any building already LEED certified has access to ARC. Add survey data response on this question.

• Separate metrics: C+D waste and recycling, materiality of building

• LCCA: Review Survey Results (20 minutes), follow up on Harvard tool

  • Results of Metrics and LCCA WG Survey (June 2019)

  • New categories to add: % space utilization/productivity/occupancy sensing through wifi? Connect into Police Dept work.

  • Re-perform model if value engineer something out.

  • Everyone do them: outside consultants and PM’s (except on very large projects). Design teams do LCCA’s now but don’t use a standard tool customized to our needs.

  • Funding: Harvard has $M set aside to cover items not in building budget but LCCA shows worth investing in.

  • Need to set time requirement: if design element doesn’t sustain itself long-term, can’t be chosen.

  • Need to include in model pain points we know we’ve experienced, like stainless steel versus galvanized duct work that has to be replaced a lot, so factor into LCCA.

  • Use tool for projects over $5M and it includes certain systems like mechanical.

  • Use Harvard’s tool or build our own? Design teams use their own. Triton design team might have a tool we want to continue to use on other projects.

• To include or not include embodied carbon?

• Next Steps

  • Resiliency plans (climate change impacts, water/drought, stormwater and sewer, safety, energy). Doug Kot (DNG-GL) past meeting with local gov’t, airport, port authority, universities, etc.

  • UC Green Building WG looking at metrics relative to long-term temp changes and climate change. Working with Integral Group to develop new design guidelines that take into account future temp changes. Tend to not use typical meteorological year but use current year temp data and future projections.