subscribe
e-newsletter
digital edition
product info
advertise
Mcgraw Hill Construction
    Subscribe to GreenSource the magazine
of sustainable design: $19.95 for one year
comment

CASE STUDY REVISIT:
Center for Health and Healing

Portland, Oregon

A Closer Look Pays Off: Remarkable energy efficiency and water savings, but ambivalent tenants, at a cutting-edge medical facility.

Originally featured October 2007
GBD Architects

By Nadav Malin

The building’s energy use intensity (EUI) is remarkable for a medical facility with such abundant equipment; the large drop in gas use between year
two and year three is attributed to the reprogrammed controls on the
microturbines.
Photo © Jamz Photography

The building’s energy use intensity (EUI) is remarkable for a medical facility with such abundant equipment; the large drop in gas use between year two and year three is attributed to the reprogrammed controls on the microturbines.

Rate this project:
Based on what you have seen and read about this project, how would you grade it? Use the stars below to indicate your assessment, five stars being the highest rating.
----- Advertising -----

KEY PARAMETERS

Location Portland, Oregon

Gross area 400,000 ft2 (37,000 m2) plus parking

Cost $120 million

Annual purchased energy use (2010) 74 kBtu/ft2 (845 MJ/m2)

Annual carbon footprint (predicted) 22 lbs. CO2/ft2 (109 kg CO2/m2)

Completed October 2006

Program Hospital, offices, labs, pharmacy, cafe, clinics

TEAM

Owner RIMCO: OHSU Medical Group
Developer Gerding Edlen Development
Architect/interior designer GBD Architects
Engineers KPFF Consulting Engineers (structural);
Interface Engineering (mep/commissioning)

The Center for Health and Healing at Oregon Health and Science University, a 400,000- square-foot, 16-story medical office building, was an ambitious project from the start. Comprising physician practices, outpatient surgery, a wellness center, research labs, and educational space, it incorporates a host of sophisticated energy-efficiency measures, water-conserving technologies, and other green features in an effort to show what’s possible in the often conservative market of medical office buildings. Those ambitious goals made it an especially valuable target for a comprehensive building performance study that took place about two years after occupancy. The study team deployed an occupant survey, analyzed utility bills, and compared the building’s performance to the goals that had been set for it.

The study was useful in many ways, but it paid off immediately by exposing an expensive mistake: The microturbines were supposed to generate electricity only when there was demand for heat or hot water. They are not very efficient without that dual function. Since the controls were not programmed properly, the microturbines were running nearly nonstop. By reprogramming those controls, the building’s energy use was reduced by 25 percent.

The building performance study also revealed that energy used by occupants for medical and office equipment was higher than anticipated. That’s a challenge that Alliance Director Dyann Hamilton of CB Richard Ellis, with support from the building owners, is attacking with two strategic initiatives: first, with a comprehensive tenant education and communication program; and second, by retrocommissioning the building. “We will continue striving for the original target of 60 percent energy savings,” notes Hamilton. She is also pursuing a follow-on to the building’s original LEED-Platinum certification, with certification at the same level through the LEED for Existing Buildings Operations & Maintenance rating system.

The tenant-education program is also intended to help staff in the building understand more about how it operates and how its energy savings translate into lower rent costs for them. That’s in part in response to somewhat disappointing results of the occupancy survey, which revealed some dissatisfaction with things like temperature, noise, and, especially, people’s ability to control their environment. The study also looked for signs of improved occupant health by comparing the number of days staff took sick leave. They didn’t find the hoped-for improvement—in fact, the data show a slight, but not statistically significant, increase in sick days.

 

This article appeared in the July 2011 print issue of GreenSource Magazine.

 Reader Comments:

Sign in to Comment

To write a comment about this story, please sign in. If this is your first time commenting on this site, you will be required to fill out a brief registration form. Your public username will be the beginning of the email address that you enter into the form (everything before the @ symbol). Other than that, none of the information that you enter will be publically displayed.

We welcome comments from all points of view. Off-topic or abusive comments, however, will be removed at the editors’ discretion.

----- Advertising -----
Click here to go to product info Page
McGraw-Hill Construction

Search Sweets

Example: Building Products, CAD, BIM, Catalogs
Search
Reader Feedback
Most Commented Most Recommended
Rankings reflect comments made in the past 14 days
Rankings reflect comments made in the past 14 days
Recently Posted Reader Photos

View all photo galleries >>
Recent Forum Discussions

View all forum discusions >>