2013
Green Globes New Construction
Certification
Drexel University URBN Center
David Eldridge
Grumman/Butkus Associates
6/21/2013
June 21, 2013
Page 2 of 12
June 21, 2013
Simone Pucca-Fera
Pucca-Fera, Inc
3208 Denfield Place
Philadelphia, PA 19145
Re:
Green Globes Stage 2 Assessment for New Construction
Drexel University URBN Center Building
G/BA #13-155.01
Dear Ms Pucca-Fera,
Thank you for the opportunity to complete a Green Globes Stage 2 analysis of Drexel University’s URBN
Center project in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This second and last stage of the Green Globes assessment
included on-site verification of the items that were discussed during the Stage 1 Assessment completed
on 5/14/2013.
I visited the site on 6/3/2013 and was met by you as well as Ad van Hees from Drexel University’s
Facilities department. Outstanding items not verified during the Stage 1 Assessment were verified during
the Stage 2 Assessment.
New Construction Stage 2 Assessment
Stage 2 of the new construction project included a review of additional documents provided since the
Stage 1 review. These included but are not limited to construction documents, narratives, calculations,
and other documents.
Overall, the project has many sustainable features included in the design. The Stage 2 assessment
resulted in an adjusted score of 682 out of 953 applicable points, 71.6% of the applicable total. This
rating places the project at a Three Green Globes rating. The revised percentages for each category are
shown below in Figure 1. The project received 47 “not applicable” points, which is less than the Green
Globes limit of 100 points.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 3 of 12
Figure 1: Green Globes Assessment Areas with Percentages “As Revised” Building achieved an overall rating
of 71.6% based on the Assessor adjusted score, which may vary from the system score due to manual adjustments
as detailed in the Point Summary Table.
Green Globes Ratings
85-100%
Demonstrates national leadership and excellence in the practice of
energy, water, and environmental efficiency to reduce environmental
impacts.
70-84%
Demonstrates leadership in applying best practices regarding energy,
water, and environmental efficiency.
55-69%
Demonstrates excellent progress in the reduction of environmental
impacts and use of environmental efficiency practices.
35-54%
Demonstrates a commitment to environmental efficiency practices.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 4 of 12
Figure 2: Green Globes Assessment Areas with Scores “As Revised”
A recounting of the Green Globes Stage 2 evaluation for each assessment area is included in the following
sections.
After Stage 1, the project was submitted at a 67.7% rating; however, several instances of full and partial
credit were identified and updated during the Stage 2 Assessment resulting in an increase to the awarded
score.
In a few instances, recommendations for improvement on future projects are identified. Of particular
importance for Drexel University are items that would have sustainable impacts across the campus,
including those related to minimization of off-site treatment of water, alternative fuel re-fueling facilities,
and increasing water efficiency through lower flow plumbing fixtures. If these were implemented, the
Green Globes ratings for future projects would be improved.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 5 of 12
Point Summary Table-Comparison
Green Globes® New Construction Assessor Report
Drexel University URBN Center, Philadelphia, PA
Assessor Manual and Survey Point Adjustments
Point Summary
Assessor:
David Eldridge
Assessment Dates:
6/3/13-6/4/13
Date:
6/12/2013
SECTION 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND PRACTICES
Description
1.1 Integrated Design Process
1.2 Environmental Purchasing
1.3 Commissioning Plan- Documentation
1.4 Emergency Response Plan
Management Totals
Third Party Third Party
User Self- Assessed
Assessor
Evaluation
Online
Manual
Survey
Survey
Point
Scores
Scores
Adjustment
20
20
0
10
10
0
15
15
0
5
5
0
50
50
0
Final
Third
Assessed
Maximum
Party
Points
Total
Third Party
Points
Assigned
Change
Applicable
Assessor
Available
Nonfrom User
Points
Final
without Non- Applicable
Self
Available
Scores
Applicables
Points
Evaluation Comments & Explanation
20
20
20
0
10
10
10
0
15
15
15
0
5
5
5
0
Emergency plan provided 5/20/13
50
0
50
50
0
SECTION 2: SITE
Description
2.1 Developed Area
2.2 Minimization of Ecological Impact
2.3 Enhancement of Watershed Features
User SelfEvaluation
Survey
Scores
30
23
0
Third Party Third Party
Assessed
Assessor
Online
Manual
Survey
Point
Scores
Adjustment
30
0
16
0
0
0
Final
Third
Assessed
Maximum
Party
Points
Total
Third Party
Points
Assigned
Change
Applicable
Assessor
Available
Nonfrom User
Points
Final
without Non- Applicable
Self
Available
Scores
Applicables
Points
Evaluation Comments & Explanation
30
30
30
0
Only impervious surfaces are public sidewalk.
URBN center has only pervious surfaces. 7 points
30
7
23
16
-7
changed from "yes" to "N/A".
15
15
0
0
Stage 1: Landscaping drawings show that only two
species will be planted at the URBN bldg: lilyturf
and Boxwood. Lilyturf is an invasive spacies and
Boxwood was not found to be native to PA. -20pts
2.4 Enhancement of Site Ecology
Site Totals
20
73
0
46
8
8
40
115
6
13
34
102
8
54
-12
-19
Stage 2: Verified N/A for natural corridor (+6 NA),
species selection -6, non-irrigated where applicable
for remaining points
SECTION 3: ENERGY
Description
Third Party Third Party
User Self- Assessed
Assessor
Evaluation
Online
Manual
Survey
Survey
Point
Scores
Scores
Adjustment
3.1 Building Energy Performance
100
40
0
3.2 Energy Demand Minimization
3.3 Energy Efficient Systems
3.4 Renewable Sources of Energy
87
60
0
77
60
0
8
0
0
3.5 Energy-Efficient Transportation
Energy Totals
66
313
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
66
243
2
10
Final
Third
Assessed
Maximum
Party
Points
Total
Third Party
Points
Assigned
Change
Applicable
Assessor
Available
Nonfrom User
Points
Final
without Non- Applicable
Self
Available
Scores
Applicables
Points
Evaluation Comments & Explanation
Stage 1: Energy model data provided and correct
kBtu and energy savings information entered.
20.2% energy savings which caused the correct
100
100
40
-60
score to be 40 (-60 points).
(1) Walls and roof were existing to remain - no
need to meet Energy Code: 10 pts reinstated. (2)
Only atrium lighting is controlled via photometric
sensors -5 points partial credit. (3) Lighting is
metered separately through Lutron system + 3
114
5
109
85
-2
partial points.
66
66
60
0
20
20
0
0
80
380
5
80
375
68
253
2
-60
Stage 1: (1) Alt. fuel refueling is not N/A: +4 to
applicable (2) Changing facilities is not N/A: +10 to
applicable. Stage 2: (1) Partial credit given for
lockers for students +5 points, majority of students
live within walking distance. (2) Bike racks are safe
but not covered. Partial credit -3 points.
June 21, 2013
Page 6 of 12
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 7 of 12
Project Management
During the Stage 2 assessment, I was able to verify the integrated design process, verify installation of the
green products specified, and confirm that a team approach was used.
The General Contractor’s Environmental Emergency Response Plan was provided prior to the site-visit
which reinstated five (5) points from the Stage 1 review.
Precis Engineering was hired as the Commissioning Authority and a Commissioning Plan was provided.
Drexel University was still expecting the final commissioning report.
The Drexel URBN Center was awarded 50 out of 50 possible Project Management points, equivalent to
a 100% rating.
Drexel University should continue good practices in this area.
Site Considerations
The project site is an existing serviced site in a dense urban area. The site is not a floodplain, a wetland, or
a wildlife corridor. Erosion control measures were detailed on the civil engineering plan C701.
During the Stage 2 Assessment, I verified that the only impervious surfaces are the public sidewalk. The
URBN Center itself only controls pervious surfaces outside of the building, so seven (7) points were
changed from “Yes” to “N/A.”
The Stage 2 survey verified that there were few façade lights and the windows have manual shades that
will reduce light trespass; bird strikes are not an issue, given that it is a low-rise building with no “see
through” facades.
Stage 1 reduced the awarded points by twenty (20), since the landscape drawings only showed two
species of plantings for the URBN Center: creeping lilyturf and boxwood. Neither species is native to
Pennsylvania and creeping lilyturf is considered an invasive species. During Stage 2, points for this
category were broken down into three parts. Six (6) points were assigned to protection of natural
corridor, six (6) points were assigned to plant species specifications, and eight (8) points were assigned to
minimizing irrigated lawn areas. The URBN Center was a major renovation project that did not affect the
existing natural corridor so six (6) points were changed to “N/A.” Given the non-native plant species, six
(6) points were changed to “No.” Finally, since the landscaped areas did not include lawn and are not
irrigated, eight (8) points were left as “Yes.” This resulted in a reduction of twelve (12) awarded points
and an increase of six (6) not-applicable points.
The Drexel URBN Center is awarded an adjusted score of 54 out of 102 possible Site Considerations
points, equivalent to a 53% rating.
Suggestions for future projects:
Future projects should look to build new construction on a remediated site, where applicable. Storm
water management could be improved with a green roof and selecting pervious materials for any parking
lots and hardscapes.
Specify measures to minimize heat build-up on the roof, such as a green roof or high-albedo roofing
materials. Use Energy Star compliant, high-reflectance, and high-emissivity roofing (initial reflectance of
at least 0.65, a three-year-aged reflectance of at least 0.5 when tested according to ASTM E903, and an
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 8 of 12
emissivity of at least 0.9 when tested according to ASTM 408). Green roofs are lightweight and easy to
maintain. Green roof systems may be irrigated or not. They can be designed to be accessed by occupants.
Specify a naturalized landscape utilizing native plants and trees. The number of indigenous species on a
site can be increased through naturalization, whereby woodlands, meadows and wetlands are re-created
through natural regeneration or deliberate planting over time. Where possible preserve or create natural
habitat cores and corridors. If land must be cleared, specify that native plants should be salvaged for replanting on the site as part of the landscaping.
Energy
The Drexel URBN Center has implemented some energy saving measures as well as constructed a
building with high efficiency equipment.
Energy performance targets were set for this project. The energy model provided total project energy
usage based on ASHRAE Standard 90.1. The model showed a 20.2% energy improvement. The original
submission had 100 points awarded in this sub-section but 20.2% equates to forty (40) points. Thus
awarded points were reduced by sixty (60) points.
The walls and roof of the URBN Center were existing to remain and thus did not need to meet Energy
Code, so ten (10) points were reinstated from Stage 1. The new windows in the facility had a low U-factor,
a high visual transmittance and interior shades to enhance thermal comfort.
The building is equipped with sheet and cementitious waterproofing to prevent groundwater and/or rain
penetration into the building. Air barriers specified in section 07 2700 met the requirements of local and
national codes.
The Drexel URBN Center incorporates energy-efficient equipment through the use of air handling units
with economizer cycles and enthalpy wheels, 86% efficient boilers, a high-efficiency chiller, variable
speed drives on cooling tower motor and pumps, and energy-efficient elevators.
The original questionnaire stated that the electrical lighting was integrated with daylighting, however
this was only verified for the atrium lights. Partial credit was assigned for a decrease of five (5) points.
Stage 1 determined that energy sub-metering was applicable to this project, so this question was changed
to “No” from “N/A.” Stage 2 confirmed that the lighting is sub-metered through the Lutron lighting
control system. Partial credit was assigned for an increase of three (3) points.
Stage 2 confirmed that a bicycle rack was installed in a secure location but it is not covered. Partial credit
was assigned for a decrease of three (3) points.
Stage 1 changed alternative fuel re-fueling facilities and the changing facilities credits to applicable,
which increased the applicable points by a total of fourteen (14). Stage 2 determined that lockers are
provided for students if they needed to store changes of clothing. Also the majority of students live
within walking distance of the building. Partial credit was assigned for an increase of five (5) points.
After making adjustments based on the Stage 2 Assessment, the Drexel URBN Center is awarded 253 out
of 375 possible Energy points, equivalent to a 67% rating.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 9 of 12
Suggestions for future projects:
A potential campus measure would be adding alternative-fuel re-fueling facilities throughout the
campus. As alternative-fuel cars become more popular, this would present a nice addition for staff and
visitors. Availability in common parking areas could increase the sustainability for multiple buildings.
The use of renewable energy could be added in the way of solar water heaters for domestic water. A
feasibility study could also be done for possible Photovoltaic (PV) or wind energy use at this facility.
The electrical engineer could design the metering system to allow for submetering of major end uses.
Sub-metering helps to motivate energy efficiency by monitoring the energy used for particular items. A
Measurement and Verification plan could also be written to track and analyze the data gathered by the
submeters.
Water
Daily water consumption targets were not established for this building, though some water savings is
realized through proximity detectors on urinals.
Stage 1 removed twelve (12) points for specifying non-low-flow water closets, sinks, lavatories, and other
water savings appliances. Stage 2 assigned two (2) points partial credit, since the lavatories were seen to
have 0.5 gallons/minute aerators. Also, the clothes washer machines were verified to be ENERGY STAR®
rated, which reinstated four (4) points under “other water-saving appliances.”
Stage 1 changed water sub-metering to “applicable,” for four (4) additional applicable points.
Since there is no irrigation system for the URBN Center building, this is considered a water-efficient
system and so five (5) additional points were awarded during Stage 1. Additionally, Stage 1 changed
non-potable water use credit to “N/A.”
Based on the Stage 2 Assessment, the Siloam Springs Replacement Hospital is awarded 20 out of 70
possible Water points, equivalent to a 29% rating.
Suggestions for future projects:
Low-flow water closets (less than 1.6 GPF) provide a significant savings to both water and sewer bills
without sacrificing performance. High Efficiency Urinals (HEUs) can also be specified down to 0.128 GPF
for additional savings above the 0.5 GPF urinals.
Insert low-flow aerators into kitchen/break room faucets and other faucets where a higher flow is not
needed. Low-flow aerators are inexpensive, are easy to install, and generally do not hinder performance
of the sink. For metering faucets, a flow rate of 0.25 gallons/cycle is standard and this rate can be reduced
by either lowering the cycle time or by inserting a low-flow aerator. Consult with the metering faucet
manufacturer for compatible aerators and instructions on how to adjust the metering time.
Graywater collection or recovered condensate could be reused for non-potable water reuse (flushing
toilets/HVAC system make-up) in the building could be considered for future building projects to
improve the sustainability in relation to water use resources.
It was discussed during the site visit that a future renovation of the restroom facilities will likely improve
the water use efficiency of the building.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 10 of 12
Resources, Building Materials, and Solid Waste
Overall, the strengths of the Drexel URBN Center project for this category lie in building adaptability, the
use of materials with low-VOC, and recycled content.
Although no Life Cycle Assessment data was calculated, the discussions during Stage 2 confirmed that
thought was given to reduce life-cycle impact by utilizing the existing foundation/flooring assemblies as
well as the majority of the structural and roof elements. However, since no LCA was performed for the
added structural systems for the new atrium, partial credit was awarded with a decrease of five (5)
points.
Stage 2 confirmed that 50% of the structure (not shell) was not reused and so seven (7) points were
removed from this question.
Used materials were incorporated into the project through the reuse of existing concrete flooring and
reclaimed wood. Materials with recycled content included steel and wood flooring. The sheathing was
specified as Forestry Stewardship Council certified.
Stage 1 removed five (5) points since “operable and pivoting walls” do not qualify under for easy
disassembly but do qualify for building adaptability. In order to qualify for these points, the project
would have to include a narrative describing fastenings, fittings, and partition/wall/ceiling design and
how they allow for easy disassembly.
Construction Waste Management plan was included in the specifications and included a 75% reduction
goal.
Stage 2 confirmed prevalent recycling containers throughout the building.
The Drexel URBN Center received a final score of 74 out of 100 possible Resources points, equivalent to
a 74% rating.
Suggestions for future projects:
The main area for improvement on future projects is to perform detailed life-cycle assessments on
building materials and assemblies.
Additionally, future projects should ensure that materials and assemblies allow for easy disassembly.
Components should be used that can be assembled or fastened in a manner that reduces deconstruction
waste and facilitates reassembly into new construction.
Emissions, Effluents, and Other Impacts
This project did well in this category by the use of environmentally preferable refrigerants, low NOX
boilers, and localized exhaust for custodial closets and classrooms. Pest minimization practices were
specified in section 01 1000.
Stage 2 confirmed low NOx boilers, with less than 20 ppm emissions.
Stage 1 reduced the applicable points in this category by three (3) since there are no underground storage
tanks and the building is located in a low-risk region for Radon according to the EPA.
The project utilized refrigerants with zero ozone depletion potential and ASHRAE 15 is met through
refrigerant monitoring and alarm system to be installed in the mechanical room.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 11 of 12
The Drexel URBN Center project is awarded 64 out of 62 points under the Emissions category,
equivalent to a 97% rating.
Indoor Environment
Indoor air quality is enhanced through the use of airflow measurement, an ASHRAE compliant
ventilation rate, MERV 13 filters, and an HVAC system that provides effective air exchange.
Stage 1 reduced awarded points by six (6) in the air entrainment question since the air intakes for roof
mounted equipment are located closer than 30 feet from exhausts and closer than 60 feet from other
sources of pollution. However, in Stage 2, three (3) points partial credit were awarded, since the exhausts
were laboratory type with a plume height sufficient to avoid intakes.
Stage 1 increased awarded points by ten (10) since the HVAC system type and outdoor air volume
indicated that there will be effective air exchange in the building.
The ventilation rate procedure was used to determine minimum compliance to ASHRAE 62.1 and the
CFM/person rate was revised in the questionnaire to accurately state 20 cfm/person.
Stage 1 increased awarded points by five (5), since the Liebert CRAC units and Dedicated Outdoor Air
System moisture management qualify as avoiding the growth of microorganisms.
Stages 2 confirmed that views to the outside/atrium are present for the majority of offices and that the
classrooms are primarily A/V with monitors and have shades to isolate outside views when desired. Five
(5) points were reinstated from Stage 1.
Low-VOC materials in the design included floor coatings, finishes, and sealants.
Legionella risk is mitigated through the use of drift eliminators and air inlet louver screens on the cooling
tower. Additionally, all domestic water heaters are set for 120°F-140°F.
Daylighting is provided for the majority of spaces and local lighting controls relate to roof occupancy.
The Stage 2 walk-through demonstrated that indoor NC levels were acceptable and protection was
provided from undesirable outside noise. Stage 2 also verified thermal comfort conditions of all primary
spaces.
After making adjustments based on the Stage 2 Assessment, the Drexel URBN Center is awarded 167 of
190 available points in the Indoor Environment category, equivalent to an 88% rating.
Suggestions for future projects:
Future projects should try and incorporate natural or hybrid ventilation. These strategies can be used to
promote thermal comfort and lower utility bills by allowing more individual control over ventilation
rates and lessening the demands on the HVAC system. This strategy is not applicable in all building
types in a university setting but can be used in administrative areas if these areas do not connect with the
areas with pressure differential requirements.
Summary
The project has incorporated a number of significant sustainable practices into the design. The project is
recommended for a Three Green Globes level of performance.
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.
June 21, 2013
Page 12 of 12
For additional information about the Green Globes Assessment, please see the attached documents.
APPENDIX A: Client’s Self-Evaluation / Original Verifier Worksheet
APPENDIX B: System Generated Assessors Evaluation / Final Report
APPENDIX C: Updated Verifier Worksheet Including Adjustments
APPENDIX D: Site Visit Photos/Supporting Documentation
Very truly yours,
David S. Eldridge, Jr., P.E., BEMP, BEAP, HBDP
Project Manager
p:\13 projects\13155gbi.r01\wp\urbn center_stage 2 assessment report.docx
Enclosures
c:
Dianne Elliott, GBI
©2013 Grumman/Butkus Associates, Ltd.