Cost and Payback Analysis:
There were a number of sustainable design issues where the project attempted to “tunnel through the cost barrier” or in which the sustainable strategy was obviously less expensive. A key goal of the project was to provide exceptional daylighting throughout most of the school year. Our daylighting analysis convinced us that there was adequate daylight most of the time so that stepped switching, rather than much more expensive continuous dimming, would still achieve very low lighting energy levels. The project also avoided the cost of compressor-based air conditioning and duct work in lieu of cooling towers with in-slab radiant and natural ventilation. This was contingent on excellent sunshading, glazing, and insulation.
After much discussion, review and a mock-up, the design committee decided to go with knotty second growth FSC certified cedar cladding in lieu of the much more expensive clear old growth material. A simple payback analysis on the PV systems showed a return in 11 years. The Board decided this was a good investment return for their endowment and purchased the system instead of leasing it.
Process and Results:
Pre-design:
This project began with a comprehensive strategic plan and then a master plan two years later. The strategic plan specifically identified ecological literacy and connecting students to the site as a key goal, and so that was a major driver in the master plan. That resulted in the decision to keep all development within the existing campus footprint, which was a major planning challenge; and in the decision to restore the stream and a more natural riparian landscape. Students, faculty, staff, alumni and community members were all included in the process in an extensive series of workshops and outreach sessions.
Design:
The design process initiated what has become an annual sustainability day at the campus, in which students inform the broader community about the various initiatives going on on campus. During the design phase, this included student reports on a full range of green building design and operational strategies. After completion students led a series of tours with student docents focusing on specific topics at stations around campus.
Measurement and Verification:
After a number of procurement delays, the building dashboard and energy monitoring system are finally up and running. Later this year we will have our first years worth of data to compare to the energy model predictions. Follow up meetings with faculty and administration staff have reported that absenteeism is significantly reduced in the new buildings, and admission applications are significantly higher.
Rating System(s) Results:
Rating System:
LEED
Rating Date:
2010
Score or Rating Result:
Platinum for Schools
Other Information
source: http://www.aiatopten.org