Thursday, May 9, 2013

A Green Building That Helps Make Everything Greener

In the interests of full disclosure, I submitted this building for the recent Green Building of the Year Award. My connection to this building is not as a member of the project team but as one who gets to work in this building on a daily basis. I lived through the considerable challenges that the builders, architects, and occupants faced. It was observing this project that helped crystallized my long running passion for green building.  

Imagine being tasked with turning an asbestos laden, archaic, 1950's era building that sits on a Brownfields site that used to house open tanks of raw sewerage into a state of the art laboratory for the advancement of environmental science. Now, imagine being told that it's a state building, obviously budget will be a major concern. Finally, you are told that all of the functions at this lab are critical to the Commonwealth and all activities must continue without impact and all workers must remain on site and their extremely delicate equipment must remain operational throughout. 

That was the challenge. One of the difficulties was that the old portion of the building was completely renovated except for one tiny 12x12 portion. This room was an environmentally controlled chamber that had to maintain humidity and temperature within extremely tight ranges.  Inside, it housed a robot that was capable of measuring the weight of a fingerprint. It was used to measure airborne particles that are so small that over 700 of them would fit in the diameter of a human hair. When inhaled, these particles directly contribute to hospital admissions for cardiac and respiratory distress. The state monitors the levels of this pollutant and thus the importance of this small space. This chamber stayed operational and free of contamination, not missing a single sample, while the building was literally gutted and rebuilt around it. Not only did the building meet the challenge but it achieved LEED Platinum certification.


The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection William X. Wall Experiment Station, located in Lawrence Massachusetts, has been transformed into a state of the art green building. Worldwide there are 52,152 LEED certified projects, but only 1,029 (or 1.97%) are certified at the Platinum level. Of those achieving Platinum certification, only 29 in the world are LEED Platinum Laboratories. Of those, the vast majority are New Construction. The William X Wall Experiment Station not only achieved LEED Platinum certification as part of a renovation to an existing building, it did so when the existing building was designated as a Brownfields site.

The old facility was constructed in 1954 and was inadequate to handle the complex testing protocols required by today's environmental science. The WXW Experiment Station houses 52 FTE's and is the state's principle drinking water laboratory. The facility also annually performs over 15,000 lab analysis of contaminates in air, water, waste water, soil, hazardous wastes, fish, environmental evidence, and other environmental samples. The state's ambient air monitoring efforts are housed in the facility as well as the Massachusetts Occupational Safety laboratories. The building contains state of the art laboratory facilities that include clean rooms, DNA testing laboratories, inorganic chemistry laboratories, organic chemistry laboratories, toxicology laboratories, a microbiology lab, air monitoring laboratories, 2.5 micron respirable particulate gravimetric chamber, and laboratory support facilities such as building wide scientific gasses storage, hazardous waste rooms, dedicated wash rooms, high efficiency fume hoods, dedicated sample prep rooms, mechanical workshops, laboratory equipment rooms, and quality assurance lab space.

The project added 13,000 square feet of laboratory space and a major renovation of the 22,000 square foot existing lab. During the entire construction period the laboratory had to continue to operate a full capacity. During this time, all samples were analyzed and all quality assurance benchmarks had to be met. Technical systems audits, conducted by the EPA, insured that data quality objectives were achieved. The project was a 4 year, 2 phase project. All laboratory operations had to be moved multiple times and personnel had to be housed on site in construction trailers.

MassDEP, Massachusetts Division of Capital Asset Management (DCAM) and the design firm of Perkins + Will and RDK Engineers planned the project. O'Connor Constructors, Inc. was the project's construction manager.

As a top notch laboratory, the building required some unusual features. It needed Reverse Osmosis Deionized Water available in every laboratory. The labs had to be plumbed for ultra high purity laboratory grade gasses. Any source of potential contamination had to be eliminated. The entire building needed the ability to change its air within minutes. Data handling infrastructure had to be robust in order to handle the massive amounts of data that the instruments would generate. Safety features such as positive pressure labs, eyewash stations, decon showers, and emergency communications had to be incorporated throughout the work spaces. The building needed back up power and other systems to remain functional in the event of a disaster. And, the building needs to be secure and capable in the event that it is ever called upon to analyze biological threats. 


The green upgrades include: a 52.5 kW solar photo-voltaic system for on-site renewable energy production; use of the existing site as a Brownfield redevelopment; maximizing open space; rain gardens and storm water detention basins to protect the adjacent Merrimack River; water efficient landscaping; high performance roof; green roofed areas; rain water harvesting for reuse in toilets and cooling tower; water efficient plumbing (40% savings); optimized energy performance (greater than 21% over baseline, 5 LEED points); day lighting of 75% of the space; plug in charging for 2 electric vehicles; bicycle storage room and shower facilities; lighting controls; ventilation air monitoring; low emitting, regional, and recycled materials; and many other strategies. A measurement and verification plan, as well as enhanced commissioning has been incorporated to insure that the building continues to meet its certification.

The Lawrence Experiment Station was founded in 1887 and it was one of the first laboratories in the world dedicated to environmental research. In 2013, the newly renovated laboratory became one of the few LEED Platinum labs in the world and is poised to be on the vanguard of environmental science for years to come.

Kevin Dufour is an Environmental Scientist with Viridis Advisors. He collaborates with Tom Irwin on creating greener greenscapes. The opinions expressed by member bloggers are their own and not necessarily those of the USGBC Massachusetts Chapter.

Monday, May 6, 2013

Building Energy Disclosure

The US Green Building Council - Massachusetts Chapter supports the proposed building energy disclosure ordinance for the City of Boston. We have more information at our website here.


The Building Energy Reporting & Disclosure Ordinance is a Boston policy that could transform our city and make it possible to reach our climate change mitigation goals. Mayor Menino is calling for 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and the only way we're going to get there is if we can bring down the % of energy that our buildings consume. In Boston it's a whopping 70% and most building owners don't have a great handle on their building's energy and water usage. The Building Disclosure Ordinance would require owners of buildings over 20,000 sq ft to report their energy usage in a free online EPA tool called Portfolio Manager that all sectors across the country use to manage energy.


Make your voice heard by making a phone call or sending an email to your City Councilor and/or to an at large City Councilor TOMORROW. (You have to have a City of Boston address). The Ordinance is up for vote by the City Council on Wed, May 8th.


If you want to send a letter, NRDC has put together an Action Page that has a pre-drafted (but editable) letter of support for activists to send to all Boston council members (supporters must have a Massachusetts address in order to send). Please feel free to push this link out in any way you can via mailing list, social media, etc:


https://secure.nrdconline.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3055



Why BERDO is a good idea:
1) Tenants have a right to know. Without BERDO prospective tenants and buyers can't get comparable information about the utility costs of buildings they're considering moving into. BERDO will help us avoid being stuck in cold, costly apartments. Community groups support BERDO.

2) More building owners will be motivated to improve their buildings. We have had years of a voluntary benchmarking program for building owners to know how efficient their buildings are, and many owners and managers have benchmarked their buildings. Now we need a mandatory program to make sure that all tenants have the option of living in buildings that are as energy efficient as financially possible. Environmentalists, and smart building owners, support BERDO.
3) Jobs. When owners want to get their buildings insulated, they need to hire people here. These are jobs that can't be outsourced. Organized labor, including the Greater Boston Labor Council, supports BERDO.

4) Air Quality. Our neighborhoods are already plagued by high asthma rates and other illnesses associated with environmental exposures. More insulation means reduced demand for energy generated from dirty power plants -- and that means we'll have cleaner air and improved health. Moms and kids support BERDO.

What BERDO is NOT:
1) No tenants will be forced to share their utility use information.
2) No tenant will be fined.
3) Does not apply to small buildings. Only the 1200 largest buildings in Boston will be required to measure their energy efficiency (25,000 square feet or larger).
4) We do not expect that building owners will have to spend a lot of time to do the energy reporting
5) City buildings are not exempt and will be the first to be measured.




Call Your City Councilor
Here is the breakdown of Councilor contact info and how to identify which district you live in:
Verify your district: http://www.cityofboston.gov/citycouncil/districts.asp
Look up your city councilor: http://www.cityofboston.gov/myneighborhood/


Salvatore LaMattina - District 1 (Charlestown, East Boston, North End) 617.635.3200

Bill Linehan - District 2 (South Boston, Chinatown) - 617.635.3203
Frank Baker - District 3 (Dorchester) - 617.635.3455

Charles C. Yancey - District 4 (Dorchester) - 617.635.3131
Robert Consalvo - District 5 (Mattapan, Hyde Park, Roslindale) - 617.635.4210

Matt O'Malley - District 6 (Jamaica Plain, West Roxbury) - 617.635.4220
Tito Jackson - District 7- (Roxbury, SouthEnd, Fenway) 617.635.3510

Michael P. Ross - District 8 (West End, Mission Hill, Back Bay)- 617.635.4225

Mark Ciommo - District 9 (Allston, Brighton) - 617.635.3113

Felix G. Arroyo - At Large - 617.635.4205

Stephen J. Murphy - At large - 617.635.4376

John R. Connolly- At large - 617.635.3115

Ayanna Pressley - At large - 617.635.4217

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Green Buildings for Peace & Prosperity

I wrote a short introductory note to our newsletter yesterday [click on "April Newsletter"] and got a lot of comments in return. My basic thing is that green buildings are examples of reduced violence and can help psychologically reduce violence in our society. Some commented that it was too soon to connect the Marathon Bombings to our industry or any industry. Many said they thought I was right on, though I missed a couple of things. One is the connection of imported energy to human rights abuses, and the other of imported energy to terrorist-sponsoring states. I think both those thoughts merit further exploration.

I hope you will stay energized and alert to improve our building stock and the ecological, health & safety, security and human rights issues relevant to our real estate and built environment. We have a lot of work to do!

[please also see the comment from Ben Myers below, just under the "tags"]

Below is the piece:


It has been an eventful Spring in Massachusetts. We've had award contests, a membership drive, conferences, and state & municipal public policy issues. And of course I can't take the soapbox here without mentioning the Marathon Bombings. We all express our heartfelt condolences to those affected. I have not heard of anyone in our community directly, significantly, affected, though many of us have friends and colleagues who were part of the situation - as victims, helpers, or otherwise.

Let me go out on a limb and point out the relevance of green buildings to reducing dramatic violence. We are part of the solution. Our work helps to ensure that our society takes responsibility for waste products resulting from buildings. Green buildings embody less violence: reduced deleterious health effects, diminished negative effects of materials procurement and manufacturing, and they reduce projected damage estimates from long-term repercussions on the environment. This includes the reduced toxicity of green buildings and their materials, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. 

Call me a peacenik or what you will, but I do believe the embodied negative effects of buildings are diminishing every time we "green" a building. This will have positive psychological implications for everyone. Certainly there wasn't much we could do about the events of 4/15, but over time, green buildings are norming a more peaceful society. Green buildings are better buildings - and we need to ensure strong codes not just for energy efficiency, but also to prevent loss of lives as seen in building failures in the Brazil club fire or more recently the Bangladesh garment factory collapse. I'm glad to be part of this community, all working for the good cause of better buildings.
  
Our community continues to grow and to make a difference in our industry. We recently achieved our goal of bringing on 100 new members before Earth Day - a quick drive at the beginning of the year which has grown our ranks significantly. Thank you to all the new Members, and thank you for participating in our efforts.


Grey Lee
Executive Director
USGBC MA Chapter

Friday, April 19, 2013

How can we make greener leases in commercial buildings?


Endorsed by the USGBC and produced by the local Massachusetts Chapter, BuildingSmarter Buildings Forum will take place on May 9th at Suffolk University, 73 Tremont Street in Boston.

This will be a great opportunity to discuss and learn about energy efficiency incentives and ways that commercial real estate can improve both performance and marketability through sustainability.


Speakers include:
  • Brian Swett (City of Boston)
  • Bruce Percelay (Mount Vernon Company)
  • Jonathan Keefe (Cassidy Turley)
  • Cynthia Keliher (McCarter English)
  • Rives Taylor (Gensler)
  • Mark Wartenburg (Philips)
  • Derek Brown (Clean Fund)

THE MARKET

We’ve made great strides in the past 10 years. Yet great gaps still remain in construction communities with traditional separate interests: between architects – clients; between code officials – builders; between landlords – tenants; between entrepreneurs – supporters.

Landlords have little incentive to invest - in above-code approaches to maintenance, energy, water and health improvements - when payback is reaped solely by tenants.

Tenants are reluctant to renew leases in buildings that lag behind current construction practices in energy efficiency. And there’s a heavy overhang of potentially large energy cost increases in the next few years.

Green leasing is a natural extension of the green building however many barriers exist that inhibit widespread adoption of a sustainable leasing approach. Effective green leasing processes and principles remain scarcely implemented and understood by the real estate community.

In order to integrate environmentally sustainable initiatives into the commercial real estate process it is important to have both the landlord and the tenant work collaboratively to pursue and implement these initiatives. Green leasing dictates that building performance become transparent to all parties involved in the lease transaction.

We need more collaboration – connection – commitment. This event will help to provide that.




GREEN LEASING BARRIERS

Establishing consensus between landlord and tenants on how a particular building’s configuration and operation should support sustainability is the first step toward a successful green leasing agenda. The ideal green leasing document set not only delineates sustainability goals but also describes specific landlord and tenant behaviors that support them.

Declaring a commitment to manage through measurement is vital to any successful green leasing agenda. Quantitative metrics and sensible reporting protocols allow all parties to track their progress toward sustainability and make adjustments when necessary.

There are a real mutuality of concerns between the landlord and the tenant in respect of green leasing issues. The landlord is concerned about obtaining and maintaining the building’s sustainability certification and equally concerned about being in a position to meet any new environmental obligations that may be passed during the course of the lease. Likewise, the tenant will have the same concerns except that, being the ultimate payor of these costs, it will want to ensure that the return on its investment is a reasonable one.

A number of barriers do exist:

  • There can be the tendency of the parties and their counsel – who may be unfamiliar with the sustainable leasing process and principles – to focus excessively on certain legal aspects of the lease to the detriment of the process and the parties’ goals.
  • A lack of well-known effective approaches to overcome the “split incentive” created by many leases between landlord and tenant related to how each shares the costs and benefits of sustainability-related measures can impede progress.
  • The challenging market environment of the past several years has caused many market participants to defer implementing sustainability-related changes in their business practices and leasing operations that may be seen as costly or risky.
  • Many participants are still concerned about unsettled potential legal pitfalls posed by green leasing.
  • There is no comprehensive, widely distributed and easily digestible guide to overcoming these barriers and implementing sustainable practices into the leasing process.
  • More commercial leases do not currently stipulate any shared or unilateral environmental objectives.
  • Few leases incorporate provisions contemplating the reduction of waste production or require that the tenant improvements match the standards of LEED CI or equivalent.
  • Most existing commercial leases will not require certain types of materials to be used or mandate the use of environmentally friendly products by the parties. In fact, most leases will stipulate that the tenant must use new (or as new) building materials.


GREEN LEASING CONSIDERATION

Ultimately, pursuing a successful green initiative through the vehicle of a green lease requires the landlord and tenant to work collaboratively to establish key elements of sustainable practices and concrete methods of implementation. The main provisions that both parties will want to consider when entering into a green lease are the operating costs, utilities, landlord and tenant work, access and relocation rights, and the assignment and subletting provisions.

A green lease may also specifically detail things like environmentally preferable cleaning products, comprehensive landlord and tenant procurement guidelines, requirements for natural or low water consumption landscaping, the ability to specify higher cost.

GREEN LEASING PROCESSES AND PRINCIPLES

Effective green leasing processes and principles remain scarcely implemented and understood by the real estate community.

The Rationale for Sustainability

Because green leasing formalizes the meaning of sustainability between the owner and tenants, the process should begin with a transparent understanding of why this is good for both parties. A clear sustainability vision allows for better definition of the scope of the sustainability program, key metrics, and monitoring and enforcement protocols.

Reaching Stakeholder Consensus

All parties must work together to define expectations, balancing the ideal with the practical and incorporating the flexibility needed to cope with difficult leasing and capital markets. If consensus is not reached regarding the sustainability efforts of the property and one or more parties does not fully embrace the initiative, this could potentially damage other parties’ financial expectations or reputations when performance levels are not met.

Setting the Boundaries of the Sustainability Program

A green lease should be a framework for achieving the goals the landlord and tenants share on these issues, rather than an overly strict document that could become a barrier to tenant attraction and retention.

Moving Toward Common Ground

It helps to begin with an entirely new lease template – adding green components or making amendments to an existing lease document can prove cumbersome and limit your flexibility. If circumstances make wholesale updating of existing tenant leases impractical, a phased approach may be required. In some situations, one tenant’s lease may contradict or prohibit the sustainability goals of another tenant. Identifying and actively managing these conflicts – and striving for consistency in lease language wherever possible - can help prevent friction or disappointments among the building’s occupants.

Assembling a Green Document Set

The best approach is to supplement the lease itself with the following exhibits or appendices:

  • Guidelines for materials and procedures related to tenant fit-out
  • A tenant primer that extends the concept of green to office equipment, recycling, travel and day to-day practices (e.g., the proper use of operable windows in air-conditioned spaces)
  • Procurement guidelines that reinforce the building’s goals of resource-efficiency, indoor air quality, etc.


This integrated set of materials provides greater detail than any single document could. Moreover, this approach distinguishes items that are within the landlord’s control and enforceable under the terms of the lease from ones that may be just as important to the building’s sustainability profile but depend on the tenant’s voluntary compliance.

Requirements and Enforcement Protocols

A green lease should facilitate the achievement of mutually agreed upon levels of sustainability. Both landlord and tenant need to understand what a good job looks like, how their respective performances will be tracked, and how failures to meet standards will be identified and remedied. Before obligating either party to any green standard, practice or reporting protocol, be sure it is both attainable and cost-effective.



Incentives for Collaboration

The ideal green leasing arrangement is one where the landlord forms a collaborative rather than a paternalistic relationship with its tenants. Clearly delineated mutual goals and transparency in reporting are two key elements of this collaboration. And make sure your lease form defines “who pays for” and “who benefits from” greening investments where appropriate.

Managing Through Measurement

Reporting is critical to the success of any green program. Your green leases should delineate the type of reporting that you intend to request and provide. Establish upfront which data sets will be exchanged, at what frequency and at what cost, in order to satisfy the reporting needs of the landlord or any tenant. Each party needs to understand what level of reporting will be required and agree to allocate the dollars and human capital needed to deliver data in a timely fashion.

Considering that the relentless pursuit of energy efficiency is perhaps the most significant step that a commercial building can take on its path to sustainability, any green lease should include a clause that requires the cooperation of landlord and tenants in benchmarking the building’s energy performance with EPA’s Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool.

Certification Strategy and Frequency

Once you decide to pursue a sustainability program for your building, you need to investigate whether you (and/or your tenants) are willing to invest the time and money necessary to secure third-party validation of its sustainability. Decide if you’re simply seeking a one-time certification or are willing to commit to tracking and certifying your building’s performance over the long term. The latter choice should not be made casually – you’ll need to stay up-to-date as green standards and rating systems evolve.

Allocating Greening Expenses

Retrofits that enhance the building’s energy efficiency; engineering and other assessments related to various building certifications; and, higher insurance premiums that entitle you to have damaged portions of your building rebuilt to green standards (and recertified as such) are just a few examples of the cost of greening a building. A green lease should clearly reference these expenses and describe how they will be allocated between landlord and tenant. Some tenants may insist on setting a limit on the amount of green expenses that they will be asked to shoulder in any given year.


[This article written by Dennis Walsh, Building Better Buildings Organizer]