Beyond buildings: holis0c sustainable outcomes for university buildings

Transcription

1 Beyond buildings: holis0c sustainable outcomes for university buildings Usha Iyer- Raniga Trivess Moore Karishma Kashyap Ian Ridley Mary Myla Andamon School of Property, Construc3on and Project Management, Centre for Urban Research RMIT University Source: Lyons Architects October th Interna0onal ACTS Conference

2 Outline Introduc+on Background Research Aim Methodology Findings Conclusion

3 Background Climate Change and Adapta+on Impacts buildings adversely, hence climate adap3on of the exis3ng and new buildings is crucial Buildings are very large contributors to environmental deteriora;on contribu;ng from 15% to 45% of the total environmental burden (Levin, 2009) Buildings Buildings account for 40% of the world s energy consump;on and one third of global greenhouse gas emissions (Cooper, 2001) Total stock of University buildings in Australia in 2014 was 10.4 million m 2 building floor area (COAG, 2012) Management of built assets Educa+onal Ins+tu+ons Future proofing assets 3

4 Performance of buildings needs to be constantly evaluated and monitored to achieve u+lity targets in terms of climate change and adapta+on. Governments throughout the world have been proac+ve at arres+ng climate change, focus on adapta+on is s+ll not emphasised. Both the func+onality of the exis+ng built environment and the design of future buildings are likely to be altered by climate change impacts. Commitment for improving the energy performance of buildings should be considered as a strategic objec+ve (Urge- Vorsatz, Harvey, Mirasgedis & Levine, 2007).

5 RMIT Strategic Plan ( ) The Red Paper gives an overview of RMIT s Strategic Plan. It is an interpre+ve guide to our bold vision with three key elements which are: Building RMIT s future from its founda+ons. Refining RMIT s dis+nc+ve strengths, so that it becomes a university of technology and design; global in its presence, reach and impact; +ghtly connected with and relevant to the professions and industries with which it is engaged. Combining dis+nc+ve strengths to chart a successful course through a shizing but exci+ng ter+ary educa+on landscape.

6 Opportuni0es A significant pathway to achieving sustainability goals across the university is through the development (or improvement) of built environment assets. RMIT University has a number of innova+ve new buildings, which have been designed to deliver exemplary sustainability outcomes, and enhanced teaching and learning experiences for staff and students. While recognised for sustainability outcomes from theore+cal perspec+ve, there have been no performance evalua+ons of RMIT buildings. 6

7 RMIT has commi]ed to a greenhouse gas emissions reduc+on target of 25 per cent by 2020 based on 2007 levels RMIT has made a commitment to purchase 20 per cent of the University s electricity from cer+fied Green Power Funding support from the RMIT Sustainability Commi]ee

8 Swanston Academic Building (SAB) SAB is a $182 million, 12 level, 35,000m 2 innova0ve learning and teaching facility with capacity for 6,000 students and office accommoda0on for 850 staff. Engaging future genera+on of teaching, learning and students, Crea+ng a ver+cal campus, Achieving a 5 star Green Star Educa+on Design v1 ra+ng, Using a design and construct guaranteed maximum price contract, Early building comple+on; 108 days ahead of schedule, Innova+ve IT development across the university, and the southern hemisphere, and Innova+ve design and materials 8

9 Research Aim Using the experience of an iconic building that has won numerous awards in Australia, the aim was to capture the learning from the perspec+ve of educa+onal ins+tu+ons as owner- occupiers of built assets using a triple line bo]om approach. Ø An overview of the challenges confronted by the educa;onal facili;es and implica;ons of preparing these facili;es for climate change Source: %2Frmitfacade7.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sapphirealuminium.com.au %2Fnews.html&docid=BvRLFWLrFm04ZM&tbnid=StZq4ibRvtK5NM %3A&w=600&h=401&ved=0CAQQxiAwAmoVChMIhIm3u9PSyAIVoiCmCh3p5wKl&iact=c&ictx=1 9

10 Methodology The case study was undertaken using a mixed method approach Three key steps involved are as follows: i. Standard BUS survey undertaken for all building users ii. Quan+ta+ve analysis and valida+on of the survey results against building energy data SAB s Building Management System (BMS), through monitoring equipment, e.g. Hobo data loggers and data provided by RMIT Property Services) iii. August 2012 (when the building opened) to December 2014 Interviews undertaken with the project team, both internal and external to the educa+onal ins+tu+on, complemented by post occupancy evalua+on (POE) examining energy and water use of the building The POE focussed largely quan+ta+ve outcomes on the metrics of energy and water use, whereas the stakeholder interviews focused more on the process and role of management in the design, construc+on and opera+on of the SAB. 10

11 What is Post Occupancy Evalua0on (POE)? POE over the years has progressed from a one dimensional feedback process to a mul+dimensional process that acts as an integrated element that can help drive the building procurement process further (Hadjri and Crozier 2009, p.33) Benefits: Con+nuous improvement (Zimmerman and Mar+n 2011) Acts as a useful snapshot of user s views Assists in be]er understanding of the use and re- use of buildings (Whyte & Gann, 2001) Assists in improving the commissioning of buildings Improvement of facili+es Closing the gap between building occupa+on and management

12 Semi structured Interviews 17 in total with internal and external stakeholder Architect Project Manager Builder ESD engineer Facili+es manager Senior managers Advisors PS staff Source: album / RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 12

13 Building User Survey Staff and HDR students and hard copy survey 150 responses out of 689 (20% response rate) U+lity consump+on data checked using the actual metering and BMS data Data cross- checked with the performance analysis and stakeholder interviews to triangulate outcomes RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 13

14 Energy (kw/m 2 ) Actual Performance (normalised) Average of comparable RMIT University City campus buildings Green Star Target The Design Annual Energy Performance Target of SAB Comparison of actual and target/predicted energy performance 14

15 RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 15

16 Comparison of SAB CO2 emissions against interna0onal benchmark low energy university buildings RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 16

17 Building energy: occupant/year 3.5 Electricity intensity (kwh/m2/occupant/year) SAB occupant Average occupant of comparable RMIT University City campus buildings RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 17

18 Annual Energy intensity kwh/m 2 /occupant RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 18

19 In terms of water consump+on, the building was found to have 61% lower water consump+on to other RMIT buildings when adjusted for floor area From a greenhouse gas emissions perspec+ve, the building is performing at 3.5 +mes higher than the predicted rate The BUS survey confirmed that the building performed excellently in three categories: overall comfort, design and image to visitors, but poorly in two categories: perceived health and overall noise The survey results placed the building in terms of sa+sfac+on levels in the 64% top percen+le compared to the Australian benchmark data. From a management perspec+ve there is a significant improvement on u+lity consump+on and occupant sa+sfac+on of the SAB in comparison to other RMIT University buildings It is clear that actual outcomes are not (yet) matching predic+ons. 19

20 Interviews: Overall the development of the SAB has been very successful from an environmental sustainability perspec+ve, occupant perspec+ve and financial perspec+ve. The evalua+on of the SAB has shown that amongst the various criteria for success within a TBL approach, there is need to: Ensure top- down buy- in from all levels of management at the university Establish environmental sustainability criteria upfront to shape design and outcomes Allow enough +me and processes for architect and other key stakeholders to integrate and work out details of the vision from the beginning Include an as- built ra+ng requirement (i.e., performance) Address disconnect between predicted and actual building performance Allow sufficient +me for a detailed design phase Allow adequate resources to prepare staff for cultural transi+on 20

21 Feedback from stakeholders New teaching and learning spaces generally well received Some learnings about what spaces don t work as well as others Significantly higher occupa+on than predicted BUS survey found Performed above average for design, image and winter temperature Performed below average for noise and health (perceived) student portals are a phenomenal success. You can t move because they are so full and busy RMIT University 2015 School of Property, Construction & Project Management 21

22 It s good to allow people the opportunity to comment and allow buy- in especially when you are using architecture to drive cultural change, which this building is doing. (Stakeholder 4) Source: School of Property Construction and Project Management

23 The u;lisa;on stats from last year was 20% more awendance in the classes in the building than the rest of the university. (Stakeholder 9) At $6,000 per m 2, if you can save a couple of classrooms that saves you a lot of money. (Stakeholder 9) Source: 23

24 [The architects] culture and approach to design is one where they do put sustainability upfront within the design process From a sustainability engineers perspec;ve, that works in our favour as you know you are going to get that engagement early in the process and buy in. (Stakeholder 2) Source:

25 Conclusion In terms of energy and water consump+on, the SAB did not achieve its Green Star Educa+onal Design v1 targets Performing significantly be]er than other RMIT buildings in the same city campus The underlying philosophy of par+cipa+on and consulta+on with various stakeholders can be a]ributed to the success of the SAB and a key driver of improving TBL outcomes of early comple+on The rela+onships built between the various team members during the design process benefi]ed other projects To meet the design intent, performance measures must be set and monitoring must take place, so that disconnect between design and performance no longer exists Formal documenta+on of lessons learnt will allow owner occupiers to learn from the experience and fast track be]er TBL, 25

26 Contact: Associate Professor Usha Iyer- Raniga Contact details: Usha.Iyer- Raniga@rmit.edu.au 26

27 MAC Lead and Co- Leads Other 10YFP Programmes Coordina0on Desk Work Stream 1 Work Stream 2 Work Stream 3 Work Stream 4 Area 1 Coordinator objec+ves success measures ac+vi+es results related ini+a+ves Partners Area 2 Coordinator objec+ves success measures ac+vi+es results related ini+a+ves Area 3 Coordinator objec+ves success Coordina0on measures Desk ac+vi+es results related ini+a+ves Area 4 Coordinator objec+ves success measures ac+vi+es results related ini+a+ves Partners Partners Partners Cross-cutting themes Enabling Frameworks Sustainable Housing Sustainability in Supply Chain Reduce Climate Impact Knowledge sharing Outreach Awareness raising 27

28 Lead Co-Lead Co-Lead Co-Lead MoE RMIT UNEP WGBC Coordinator Coordinator Coordinator Coordinator Europe Africa Asia Oceania LAC North America Communication Funding Events Partners 28

29 References ABS. (2003) Year Book Australia, Canberra: Australian Bureau of Sta+s+cs. Retrieved from h]p:// ALP. (2007). The Australian economy needs an educa;on revolu;on: New Direc;ons Paper on the cri;cal link between long term prosperity, produc;vity growth and human capital investment.. Retrieved from Barton, ACT: Arup. (2015). BUS methodology - research. Retrieved from h]p:// Candido, C., Kim, J., de Dear, R., & Thomas, L. (2015). BOSSA: a mul+dimensional post- occupancy evalua+on tool. Building Research & Informa;on, doi: / Cooper, I. (2001). Post- occupancy evalua+on - where are you? Building Research & Informa;on, 29(2), doi: / GBCA. (2013). The future of Australian educa;on Sustainable places for learning. Retrieved from Sydney: Leaman, A., & Bordass, B. (2001). Assessing building performance in use 4: the Probe occupant surveys and their implica+ons. Building Research & Informa;on, 29(2), doi: / Levin, H. (2009). Climate Change and GHG Emissions Implica;ons for Building Environmental Control. Paper presented at the Healthy Buildings 2009, Syracuse, NY. Universi+es Australia. (2014). Universi;es Australia Strategic Plan Retrieved from Canberra: Whyte, J., & Gann, D. M. (2001). Closing the loop between design and use: post- occupancy evalua+on. Building Research & Informa;on, 29(6), doi: /