EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The construction of new facilities is an opportunity for any university to make a clear statement about its environmental concern as well as cut operating costs. In the past, Princeton has made only small changes toward lessening its environmental impact through improved construction practices. The university is about to enter a phase of increased construction, where substantial appropriations for buildings will be made each year. Some new buildings will be built and multiple buildings will be undergoing major renovations.
This new construction represents an ideal opportunity for the university to adopt a new, stringent, ecologically-conscious construction policy that will achieve three primary goals: allow the university to operate more efficiently, promote proper ecological sensitivity, and raise Princeton's status as an ecologically-aware institution.
Other universities have adopted a more holistic approach to building construction and Princeton could learn from their example. Similarly, the university should adopt a clear environmental building policy that would take building use as well as design into account. Both of these are factors which should be considered early in the construction process. The university has taken small steps in improving building design such as energy efficient lighting and water fixtures. However, building design could be extended to large-scale measures such as solar heating. Other key recommendations include 1) considering an architect with a background in environmental building design who would be skilled in implementing the suggested building policy, 2) minimizing construction waste through the use of recycled construction materials, 3) considering efficient interior systems design (air conditioning, lighting, cleaning, and waste management) in all new buildings, and 4) being aware of the environmental impact of a building's intended and specific use.
Besides the lessened environmental impact that would result from the implementation of the recommendations given in this chapter, significant cost-saving benefits are inherent in each as well. Any actions that will significantly reduce the university's operating costs should be seen as beneficial.
INTRODUCTION
The construction of new facilities encompasses a wide range of areas of environmental impact. Energy use, water use, recycling and food waste are just some of the factors that are affected by building construction. This impact is manifested in the primary building design and the projected building use. Both of these factors are things which can be considered early on in the planning process for any building construction.
Over the past twenty years, Princeton has made great strides in the area of building design. In the 1970's during the energy crisis, a central computerized energy management system was installed in order to curb rising energy costs. This system not only saved the university millions of dollars, but also severely decreased its energy use. Other improvements include low-flow water fixtures, motion-sensor lighting, and increased insulation. Most of the new buildings also included better recycling facilities than older buildings. Many of these changes are the result of cost-saving measures by the university as well as newly enacted environmental legislation. However, Princeton does not currently have an environmental building policy.
Because the construction of new facilities is an area which affects so many environmental concerns, an organized commitment is necessary. Many schools have adopted a more holistic approach to environmental building design. For example, Georgetown University has a solar-energy building, while Brown and Wesleyan Universities both have ìenvironmental housesî in which students can live sustainably. These facilities indicate not only a commitment to the environment by the university, but also a reduction in operating costs.
OVERVIEW
Present Status
The last university growth phase was completed in 1989 and 1990. That phase saw the completion of the Computer Science building, the construction of Feinberg and 1927 Halls, and extensions to the Engineering Quad, Philosophy Department, and Biology Department.
Previous construction has been rather piecemeal without attention to needs of the future. As new demands were seen, planning was begun, and appropriations made. There has never been an organized plan for expansion. Creating one is rather difficult because it requires anticipating future needs of the university for the long-term.
The university is beginning to attend to its lack of long-range planning and is developing its first long-term planning report. Proper anticipation of future needs is one of the keys to having facilities and resources adequate for the university's future. A clear idea of exactly what will be required and advanced plans to provide for the necessary facilities will most certainly improve any future construction efforts. However, planning future construction, though important, was not emphasized in this study. This study focuses on the treatment of the immediate or near-term construction efforts.
Current construction can be divided into three broad categories:
ï construction of new facilities as new needs are identified that are not met by the availability of current space
ï construction of new facilities as replacements for pre-existing buildings which are beyond the point of repair
ï periodic renovations/additions to academic and residential buildings
The number of projects on the facilities agenda is concurrent, meaning that many independent projects are being completed at any given time. These projects include both renovations and construction and are at different stages of completion.
The next construction phase includes renovations in one building and construction of four new facilities. There are six buildings in various stages of development: the Woolworth Music Building, a new Math/Physics lecture hall, construction of a new stadium or major renovation of the existing Palmer Stadium, construction of a new campus center, and construction of approximately 350 new bed spaces. This new phase provides an ideal time for Princeton to gain national respect as a forward-thinking, ecologically-minded institution.
Current Projects
Six projects are currently on the drawing board, under construction, or in the planning stage. Though the campus center is the most noteworthy of them and one of the largest, the others should not be neglected. In rough chronological order of expected construction, these projects are the addition to the Woolworth music building, the building of new Math and Physics lecture halls, the reconstruction of Palmer Stadium, the building of the new Campus Center, and the construction of a new dormitory. Each project's current status is outlined and analyzed in terms of its environmental impact below.
The Campus Center
The Campus Center is the most high-profile item in the next building phase and the cornerstone of the university's next capital campaign. Earnest construction work, however, will not begin until late 1995. The location of the center has, however, been determined to be an addition and renovation of Palmer Hall.
Preliminary plans have been drawn up, but the university is currently soliciting recommendations for architectural firms. The top architectural firms being considered will be given tours of the Palmer Physics Laboratory and surroundings this summer to aid in their preliminary sketches. Competitive interviews will follow in the fall and an architectural recommendation will be given to the Board of Trustees late in the fall of 1995.
As one of the larger buildings on campus, and certainly one of the largest of recent construction, the campus center will consume many resources ó both in its construction and in its operation. This only makes it more important that the center be constructed with efficiency as one of the primary goals.
There are several ecological considerations common to the building design of any new facility which should be considered in the construction of the new campus center. These include energy efficient lighting, low-flow water fixtures, a recycling program, and energy-efficient heating systems. These are not new considerations in Princeton construction projects and should be extended to the campus center effort.
Discussions regarding the uses of the center are already underway. One suggestion is that the center should serve as a meeting and working place for students, faculty, and campus organizations. As such, it has been proposed that the building operate for substantial periods out of every day. With such a mandate, increased efficiency and energy conservation should be incorporated into its design. Various meeting rooms will be occupied and unoccupied for hours at a time. Installing motion sensitive lighting, for example, would be prudent.
A facility of this size would also have several water fixtures not only in restrooms, but also utility rooms. Low-flow faucets in the bathrooms could greatly reduce the amount of water consumption. Since the building will be occupied almost 24 hours a day, heating could become an expensive problem. Perhaps a system whereby meeting rooms can be heated individually would also make economic and ecological sense. Recycling in the student center would not differ from other university buildings. All of these concerns are outlined in the suggested campus construction policy in the recommendations section.
There are also several considerations which are specific to the construction of the campus center itself. The campus center will likely be open 24 hours a day and will serve the entire university community. Therefore, there are several opportunities for improvement in the campus communications system. Flyer distribution on campus is extensive, costly, and wasteful. Often flyers are distributed either to all mailboxes or sent to each office or dorm room. Usually these flyers are sent to announce an event. The campus center offers the opportunity to centralize the dissemination of information through a central bulletin board.
A final consideration specific to the center is the food service facilities. Plans are not yet finalized, but will most likely include a snack service as well as a full dining hall. The present design of the student center dining facility requires the use of disposable dishware because of lack of space for dishwashing. It is recommended that the campus center include adequate dishwashing facilities in order to avoid excessive use of disposables.
New Dormitories
This project has not yet received a go-ahead, but it appears likely as the square footage per person had fallen from 290 square feet with the initial construction of what has become Wilson and Butler Colleges to the current 260 square feet. Providing 350 new bed spaces would restore the square footage per person to previous levels. In addition, construction of the new bed spaces would allow the university to comfortably close a dormitory for construction during the academic year rather than for just the 10-week summer window. When the university can renovate dormitories only during the summer, this limits the university to the renovation of 75 beds per year. With 4200 beds, this puts the university on a 60-70 year renovation cycle.
At issue are two distinct problems: first, a lack of adequate space, and second, a lack of funds for renovation. Current spending calls for approximately $3-4 million per year. This renovates 75 beds per year. To decrease the length of the cycle requires both more space and more outlays for renovations. To halve the length of the cycle would require a doubling of spending on renovation to at least $6 million per year. Whether or not that is feasible is unknown, but it would appear to be in the best interests of the university to attempt it.
Shortening the renovation cycle would be in the university's best interests. Because of the length of the cycle, the university's decisions regarding dorm renovations resembles a triage unit ó the worst patients are taken first and everyone else is forced to wait. This is ultimately detrimental to the university as it is unable to perform the minor renovations that would prevent more significant renovations down the road. Constructing new bed space would be one step towards alleviating the problem.
Palmer Stadium
The status of Palmer Stadium is unknown. A team of consultants has been formed and will also present its findings and recommendations to the Board of Trustees at the May meeting. The consultants will more than likely call for the reconstruction of the stadium, as major renovations will only extend the stadium's lifetime for twenty years ó not enough time to justify the expense of renovation.
The important question for many in the reconstruction is whether the new stadium will much resemble the old. It is hoped that any reconstruction can still use the outer facade of the stadium as it bears no weight except its own. That way, any new stadium will still look much like its predecessor. Some of the considerations that will go into the reconstruction are aesthetic, but others are pragmatic.
The current track surface is also a consideration. The turns of the track are much tighter than those of other schools and there is a desire to reconfigure the track while reconstructing the stadium. It is recommended that the current track remain, as there is no structural reason warranting its reconstruction. In addition, building around the current track might very well allow for the outer facade to remain in place rather than devising some more expensive process to rebuild it or abandon it altogether.
Because the team of consultants has not finished disseminating its data, it is impossible at this time to estimate the likelihood of reconstruction or to make any predictions regarding the specifics.
Woolworth Music Building
Impetus for construction of an addition to the music building resulted from the overall lack of space for the department, the lack of a central library facility, and the poor state of the practice rooms. The north wing of the building will be razed and rebuilt as a larger structure able to house the music library currently at Firestone, new practice rooms, and faculty offices. The addition will total approximately 30,000 square feet in area. Some preliminary work has already begun in preparation for the major construction which is due to begin this summer. The addition should be completed in the 1996-1997 school year.
There are really no construction issues that are specific to the music building. Again, lighting is a concern since practice room lights may be left running all day. The general guidelines given in the following section are applicable to this upcoming construction.
Math/Physics Addition
The addition to the Math-Physics complex will be another 30,000 square foot building designed to replace the two large lecture rooms and five laboratories currently located in the Palmer Physics Laboratory. This is partly due to a desire on the part of physics faculty to move the instructional laboratories closer to Jadwin Hall, but is also in preparation for the complete renovation of the Palmer Physics Laboratory and its incorporation into the proposed campus center.
Recommendations in favor of its construction will be presented to the Board of Trustees in April or May of 1995. Currently, only preliminary plans have been drawn up. More detailed plans will be developed following approval by the Board of Trustees.
RECOMMENDATIONS
In the event that the university community finds it necessary to construct a new facility on the Princeton University campus, both the short-term and long-range environmental effects of the new construction should be considered. In order to temper the severe ecological damage often caused by the construction of a new campus facility, recommendations in the following four categories have been made: architect choice, construction material and methods, building design, including interior systems such as heating and lighting, and building use. The procedures outlined could serve as a guide for the construction of new facilities.
7.1 Consider an architect with a background in environmental building design who would be skilled in implementing the suggested building policy.
Perhaps the most important choice made in planning the design and construction of a new campus facility is also one of the very first: the architect. The architect of a new building has control over more than simply the building's design; he or she influences the entire construction process, including the materials and methods utilized throughout.
As environmental degradation due to construction becomes more and more of an issue in the architectural world, designers and contractors are working to find ways to diminish the harmful effects of construction on the environment. Good building design and construction is no longer perceived as incompatible with environmental stewardship. In fact, some of today's most innovative and most highly acclaimed architects are those individuals who have been able to successfully combine excellent architecture with sound environmental design.
One such architect, William A. McDonough, is famed for his ability to design facilities (from department stores to day care centers) across the globe which are pleasing to the eye, function practically, and have minimal effects on the environment. His nine Hanover Principles--written for the 2000 World's Fair in Hanover, Germany--are a good introduction to the ideas in which McDonough believes, and for which he has won acclaim. The following six principles are of particular interest here:
ï Insist on the rights of humanity and nature to coexist in a healthy, supportive, diverse, and sustainable condition.
ï Recognize interdependence. The elements of human design interact with and depend upon the natural world, with broad and diverse implications at every scale. Expand design considerations to recognizing even distant effects.
ï Accept responsibility for the consequences of design decisions upon human well-being, the viability of natural systems, and their right to coexist.
ï Create safe objects of long-term value. Do not burden future generations with requirements for maintenance or vigilant administration of potential danger due to the careless creation of products, processes or standards.
ï Eliminate the concept of waste. Evaluate and optimize the full life-cycle of products and processes to approach the state of natural systems, in which there is no waste.
ï Rely on natural energy flows. Human designs should, like the living world, derive their creative forces from perpetual solar income. Incorporate this energy efficiently and safely for responsible use.
McDonough, a New York architect, has followed the above principles in every design he has completed. From solar-powered residences to buildings which can be converted from medical centers into condominiums (eliminating any extensive construction), McDonough has successfully demonstrated that architectural design can in fact take into account environmental considerations.
William McDonough's firm is presently being considered for the campus center project. It is recommended that he, or another architect with similar concerns, be hired for the project. Building an environmentally sound building would not only be cost-efficient for the university, but also would be a progressive move in terms of campus construction. This would enhance the facility's contribution to the university landscape.
7.2 Be aware of the environmental impact of building practices.
The solid waste produced by the building industry has had enormous debilitating effects on the environment; construction and demolition (C & D) waste comprises 23% to 33% of municipal solid wastes. The C & D material waste stream can be divided into three main categories; concrete, asphalt, and rubble make up 50%, wood products make up 25% and other materials (glass, plastics, etc.) account for the remaining 25%. But the bulk and weight of construction materials is not the only problem associated with C & D debris; hazardous substances like asbestos are routinely found in such waste, and seemingly harmless materials such as lumber and plywood waste are often treated with toxic preservatives.
As landfills continue to fill up, and waste disposal companies become more and more reluctant to accept toxic debris, the issue of C & D waste disposal has increased in importance and has generated increasing concern within the construction community. Disposal costs have continued to rise, reflecting the steady increase in landfill tipping fees. Product manufacturers have responded to these concerns by producing materials with significant recycled or reprocessed content. For example, recycled glass is being used for "glassphalt" paving, and recycled newspapers for cellulose insulation. As Lynn Nesmith, an architectural journalist, writes, "Ready or not, construction recycling is on the way."
A great deal of innovative technology has been created to minimize the effects of construction on the environment. Following are some of the ways in which recycled materials can be used in building construction:
ï flooring made from old tires or waste glass (tiles)
ï plastic benches made from recycled HDPE plastic
ï old latex paint rather than new paint used
ï nails made from recycled cars
ï wood flooring salvaged from old barns
ï carpeting made from recycled plastic bottles
Many of the above ideas have been put to use in recent construction in the United States and around the world. It is undoubtedly less expensive than using virgin materials, creates less waste, and opens up an expanded market for recycled goods.
Perhaps most importantly, rather than creating entirely new structures, many companies and universities are opting to recycle existing structures when faced with a need for a new building. The Body Shop, for example, established its U.S. headquarters in an abandoned warehouse in North Carolina.
Many companies and other institutions are now even incorporating environmental concerns into their official construction policies; the corporate policy of Home Box Office, for example, reads "to create a healthy working environment for staff, to minimize the project's impact on the environment, and to recycle and use recycled materials as much as possible."
It is recommended that the university move to ensure that construction materials and methods employed in any new campus construction utilize the most recent technology developed to minimize harmful ecological effects of construction. The university should develop a policy regarding construction of new facilities similar to the corporate policy examples cited above. An ecologically friendly-policy would place Princeton University at the forefront of the environmental movement, improve efficiency, and would certainly decrease operating costs for the university in the long run.
7.3 When designing any new facility, consider interior systems design.
The damaging environmental effects of new construction last far beyond the final stages of actual construction; the systems for air conditioning, lighting, cleaning and waste management established in a building all have considerable--and quite harmful--ecological effects. Traditionally, it has taken an enormous amount of energy to heat, light, and cool an institutional structure. Often, much of the energy used for these processes is wasted due to inefficient distribution and insulation methods. Increasing awareness of energy issues as a result of rising energy costs and greater environmental degradation has encouraged the development of new, more efficient and less harmful systems.
With specific regards to Princeton, the university has only just begun replacing the weak overhead fluorescent lights currently in dormitories. Because those lights do not shed enough light for many students, they purchase halogen lamps that consume tremendous amounts of electricity. If the university were to provide more powerful overhead lights, the use of halogens might fall off considerably. It is recommended that the university take compensatory lighting into consideration in all future construction projects when choosing lighting fixtures.
Another consideration are the dormitory windows. Some double-pane windows are being installed, but dorms in the old gothic design are still being fitted with lead-pane windows. These windows are composed of individual glass panes that are extremely hard to maintain and very energy inefficient. Replacing these windows with windows that consist of just one pane and have lead overlays would increase efficiency and still maintain the same aesthetic appeal.
Heating and Cooling
Air-conditioning systems are perhaps the systems which consume the greatest amount of energy. Inefficient insulation and air-circulation methods can cost thousands of extra dollars--costs easily avoided by incorporating energy-use considerations into the design of a new structure. Making use of solar energy for heating and shade for cooling can immeasurably improve the efficiency of an air-conditioning system. In addition, complete insulation and tightly sealed windows reduce heat loss, driving down energy costs.
Air cooling systems often make use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), chemical compounds which are harmful to the environment, and which are in large part responsible for the severe ozone depletion seen in recent decades. The compound R134A, which does not affect the ozone layer, can be substituted for CFCs in cooling systems. The HVAC cooling system, for example, does not utilize CFCs as a cooling agent.
Lighting
Inefficient lighting systems are similar to air-conditioning systems in that they waste valuable energy resources and lead to increased dollar costs. It is important to make good use of solar light in developing lighting systems--windows should be installed to allow as much natural light as possible into the structure. Daylighting can reduce energy use by as much as 54%. In addition, solar energy should be harnessed in order to light the structure at night, when daylighting through natural light is not possible.
Other technologies that have been developed in order to reduce light energy use include: photosensors, ballasts, dimmers, and reflectors for lighting.
7.4 Be aware of the environmental impact of the buildingís intended use.
The projected use of a building can also severely affect its environmental impact. While this consideration is specific to each building's design, the following are some examples of specific concerns.
Central Communications in the Student Center
It is recommended that the university include in its plans an event/schedule board which would be either digital or dry-erase and would include a listing of weekly campus events/meetings. This would be a comprehensive listing which would also be available on-line either through Gopher or Netscape. Flyer reduction could also be accomplished through mail centralization. Shifting many of the campus mail distribution to the campus center could also alleviate flyer production.
Dry Cleaning
If dry cleaning systems are to be installed in any future campus constructions, like the proposed Campus Center, or in newly constructed dorms, the environmental effects of such systems should be considered. Dry cleaning is a process which currently employs many dangerous chlorine-containing compounds; these compounds have been found to be toxic, and quite harmful to both humans and the environment.
New water-based alternatives and methods which eliminate chemical use have been developed and approved by the federal EPA. These methods are not only better for the environment, but they are also equally as effective as, and perhaps even more profitable than, traditional dry-cleaning methods.
Waste Management
When a new structure is constructed on campus, systems for the disposal of solid wastes must be incorporated in its design. The development of practical and efficient solid waste recycling systems should not be undertaken after the structure has been completed; the design of the building should allow for the ease and practicality of recycling materials such as paper, aluminum, plastic and glass. This will allow the university to comply in the future with increasingly stringent waste disposal regulations, and will eliminate the costs of attempting to incorporate a recycling system into a structure after it has already been completed.
REFERENCES
Contacts
Bob Barnett, architect and Catherine Judd, Planning Assistant
Planning Department
Macmillan Building
William McDonough Architects (212) 481-1111
116 East 27th Street
New York, NY 10016
(They have done a great deal of sustainable architecture, might be available for help)
American Institute of Architects (202) 626-7300
1735 New York Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20006
(AIA is promoting green architecture this year)
McRecycle Registry Service (708) 575-3000
(a listing of 500 producers and suppliers of recycled products)
Environmental Construction Outfitters, NY (212) 334-9659
(sustainable building materials)
Adirondack Alternate Energy (518) 863-4338
Edinburg, NY 12134
(solar energy)
Recycled Products Guide.
American Recycling Market, Inc.
P.O. Box 577
Ogdenburg, NY 13669 (315) 471-0707.
(Contains information on recycled building materials.)
Shelter Supply, Inc. 1-800-762-8399
(energy efficiency in building, air quality, drier basements)
John Rountree Architects (203) 838-6227
26 Emerson St.
Norwalk, Ct 06855
(solar)
Other Sources
Dressed to Kill: The dangers of dry cleaning and the case for chlorine-free alternatives, Bonnie Rice and Jack Weinberg. Greenpeace/ Pollution Probe Report.
McDonough, William A., "Why Green Means Go," Interiors, March, 1993.
Nesmith, Lynn, "Ready or Not, Construction Recycling is on the Way," Architectural Record, December, 1993.
Report of the Campus Center Committee, Princeton University, May 31, 1994.
Task Force Members
Joe Faber '97
Brett Dakin '98
APPENDIX 7.A.
Energy Efficiency/Water Conservation
1. graywater tank: reuses some forms of wastewater for irrigation and other landscaping needs
2. daylighting (Andersen Windows): uses natural light instead of artificial lighting to light open spaces, can save up to 54% in energy costs, especially when done in conjunction with solar panels
3. occupancy sensors: a common source of energy savings*
4. compact fluorescent bulbs (GE, Sylvania, Panasonic, Philips): a more energy-efficient alternative to incandescent bulbs*
5. photo-sensors (Dayton, Leviton, Intermatic): activates outdoor lighting based on amount of sunlight*
6. other light alternatives: ballasts, dimmers, reflectors*
7. faucet aerators (Velva-Flo, Care-Free, LDR, Melard, Queen, Master Plumber)*
8. low-flush toilets*
9. the Sunpipe: an alternative to a skylight that reflects sunlight down a highly polished tube into a domed ceiling globe. Cost is much less than a skylight and there is less heat loss. (Sunpipe Co., PO Box 2223, Northbrook, IL 60065, ph. (708)-272-6977)
Air Quality
1. operable windows: allow occupants to open and close windows; provide more fresh air
2. wood floors absorb fewer pollutants
3. formaldehyde-free cabinets
4. radon sump basins
Recycled/Green Building Materials (made from recycled or non-toxic materials)
1. nails made from recycled Buicks (WH Maze)
2. I-beams: an alternative to wooden beams which uses less wood without sacrificing strength
3. rustic shingles made from aluminum cans (Classic Products)
4. glueless carpeting
5. HVAC system that does not use CFCís*
6. stone construction: an alternative to concrete which uses a lot of energy in production
7. HDPE plastic benches
8. walls made from gypsum and recycled newsprint
9. insulation from recycled newspapers
10. FORIS Resource Information Resource System: This is a database which has an index of various tree species which provides architects with alternative wood choices.(802) 863-6789
* indicates materials that are most economical and easily installed
This material may be used for educational and non-profit use. Commercial use of this information is prohibited without written consent. Copyright © 1995, Princeton Environmental Reform Committee, Princeton University.