Consider the cost before joining the green building movement. Does LEED fit into your budget? What are the incremental costs, and is there a return on that investment?
A recent LEED Gold certified project will demonstrate that going green and building a sustainable building is not as cost prohibitive as you may think. You can build a sustainable structure on even the tightest of budgets if you decide to go green early, plan ahead, and rely on experienced construction professionals.
In 2005, Massachusetts Maritime Academy (MMA) began to outgrow its 1960s-era residence hall. With the number of potential cadets increasing annually, the school investigated the possibility of adding more residential space. The academy hoped it wouldn’t have to use the very limited open space on the 55-acre campus for a new residence hall. Instead, the academy wanted to save it for a future library.
Located on Cape Cod at the mouth of the scenic Cape Cod Canal, the small MMA campus has nearly a dozen buildings all tightly clustered together, including one residence hall divided into six cadet sections, arranged in companies numbered 1 to 6, each with four floors of double-occupancy bedrooms. The residence hall was laid out horizontally and was all interconnected. Since land was at such a premium, the academy was resistant to move forward with plans to build a new dorm. Instead, it decided to add two floors on top of companies 1 and 2 thereby increasing the residential capacity by 150 beds without compromising any unoccupied land.
Once the decision on how to increase residential space was made, the school shifted its focus to the construction itself. All along, it had been upfront about an interest in obtaining a LEED certification for this project. Once the team was assembled and the programming and design process began, the priority shifted to determining what points to strive for and assigning responsibility for documenting those points. The team was charged with determining the best ways to incorporate as many green elements into the building while staying within the project’s approved budget parameters.
As programming and design progressed, the team assessed options for the LEED certification points. These options were reviewed for pricing, schedule and compatibility with the project’s use and functionality. It was during this process that the team narrowed down the points and determined what ones were most compatible for this project. It’s important to note that because of the nature of this project — a renovation/addition on top of an existing building — it was eligible for certain points and excluded from others. That narrowed down the options and helped to resolve exactly what points the team would try to attain.
A majority of these decisions, as it turned out, were quite easy to make. Because the project had this green focus so early in the design process, the team was able to specify point-worthy materials and methods at no incremental cost to the project. Some options, however, did carry a significant initial cost, but the long-term savings and MMA’s commitment to the environment justified their inclusion in the project. The following is a summary of the points this project achieved and their additional cost impact broken down by LEED category.
Sustainable Site – 4 LEED points out of a possible 14
At MMA, we were working with an existing building so our project had little to no environmental impact on the site. Specifically, we received points for Site Selection since we were working on an existing site; Bicycle Storage for providing bicycle racks to promote pollution-free transportation; Light Pollution Reduction, which measures how much the lighting from a building disrupts the dark of night; and Development Footprint, which, again, we received for using an existing space.
In order to earn points in this section, a project must cut down on the amount of water used altogether and utilize recycled water wherever applicable. At MMA, we were able to decrease potable water use by 48 percent through the use of dual-flush toilets, waterless urinals and low-flow lavatory sinks and showerheads. Also, no potable water is used for irrigation.
Energy and Atmosphere - 15 points out of a possible 17
All of the energy needs for the cadet residence hall addition are met by the photovoltaics on the roof and the existing wind turbine at the school. Besides producing its own energy on-site, savings in energy consumption was achieved by using numerous energy conservation measures (ECMs) that were identified during the design phase. ECMs included the use of high-performance windows that allow less heat transfer, efficient fluorescent lighting controlled by occupancy sensors, and a better-than-code natural gas domestic water heater.
Energy and Atmosphere – 15 points out of a possible 17
All of the energy needs for the cadet residence hall addition are met by the photovoltaics on the roof and the existing wind turbine at the school. Besides producing its own energy on-site, savings in energy consumption was achieved by using numerous energy conservation measures (ECMs) that were identified during the design phase. ECMs included the use of high-performance windows that allow less heat transfer, efficient fluorescent lighting controlled by occupancy sensors, and a better-than-code natural-gas domestic water heater.
Materials and Resources – 5 points out of a possible 13
MMA obtained points by using materials that have a high percentage of recycled content as well as materials that are locally harvested and manufactured thereby decreasing the pollution created by shipping items long distances. In addition, 620 tons of construction and demolition waste, or 97 percent of the project’s total waste, was salvaged or recycled rather than being sent to a landfill. At MMA, the materials for the new addition are comprised of 10-percent recycled material. This includes concrete, drywall, structural steel, window glazing and insulation — all of which had high percentages of recycled content. In addition, 45 percent of all the materials used on-site were from local sources — 17 percent of which were extracted locally.
Innovation and Design Process – 5 points out of a possible 5
This category awards points to teams and projects that go above and beyond the requirements of the LEED program. These points are awarded for exceptional performances regarding innovative processes, designs, technologies and procedures. In addition, one point is awarded in this category for having a LEED Accredited Professional on your team. The MMA project was awarded all five available points in this category.
Performance and Cost Perspectives
In total, the project secured 42 points yielding LEED certification at the Gold level at an incremental cost of $687,270. The renewable-energy systems utilized for this project cost a total of $641,120, or 92.5 percent, of the total LEED effort. The cost was made up of two components:
1. The first was the installation of an 81-kW photovoltaic array installed on the roof of the new addition. The total cost of this system, after rebates from the local energy supplier, was $550,000.
2. The second component of this cost was the proportionate share of the installation cost of the wind turbine that had been previously installed on the campus. Since this project is utilizing 114,298 kWh annually from what is generated from the turbines, which have the ability to produce 660 kW daily, we elected to account for the appropriate upfront cost of the turbine, even though there was no direct cost to this project. Again, after rebates from local sources, the cost attributed to our project represents about $91,120. The cost of this system — when analyzed using the energy cost at the time of installation — should be paid back within 5 years.
It’s important to note that the credits we received for the photovoltaics and wind turbine could have been omitted and the project would still have received a LEED certification, but MMA’s commitment to build a sustainable building and conserve on energy consumption outweighed the additional costs involved. And certainly with oil and energy costs reaching astronomical levels, this has turned out to be a most prudent decision.
To put these costs in perspective to help future project planning, consider the following:
The project consisted of a 30,000-square-foot addition (which obtained a Gold certification level) to an existing 60,000-square-foot dormitory for a total project size of 90,000 square feet. The $687,270 expended for the LEED certification points represents a square-foot cost premium of $22.90 for the Gold certification. If the renewable energy component had not been factored into the equation, the cost would only have been $46,150 — or just $1.58 per square foot — with still enough LEED points to qualify for a Gold certification.
The total incremental cost for LEED of $687,270 represents just 5.7 percent of the total project cost (including the renovation of the existing 60,000 square feet). Looking at the analysis without the renewable energy costs, the total cost would represent a premium of 0.4 percent of the project cost.
A vast majority of the MMA LEED Gold credits were received for little or no extra cost. This was a result of the early commitment by MMA and the project team to build the most sustainable structure that the program budget would allow. This project demonstrates that LEED does not have to be prohibitively expensive. Instead, with proper planning; a knowledgeable staff that knows what to specify, where to purchase it, and how to manage installation in the field; and dedicated follow through, a LEED certified project can be within any project’s budget.
Chuck Vaciliou Chuck Vaciliou is vice president of operations for Burlington, Mass.-based Erland Construction and has been with Erland since its founding in 1977. Vaciliou has extensive knowledge of all aspects of construction management, including design and constructability review; cost-control procedures; and federal, state and local codes, ordinances and permitting.
Comments (0)
