Microsoft CBE_Survey_betterBricks CBE 10 Lehrer2006 Better Bricks POE

User Manual: CBE-10

Open the PDF directly: View PDF PDF.
Page Count: 41

DownloadMicrosoft  - CBE_Survey_betterBricks CBE-10 Lehrer2006 Better Bricks POE
Open PDF In BrowserView PDF
LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

LEEDTM Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the
Occupants

David Lehrer
CBE Director of Communications
Better Bricks,
USGBC/CGBC Cascadia Chapter
Portland, November 1 2006
Seattle, November 2 2006

CENTER FOR THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT – UC BERKELEY

Today’s talk
ƒ About the Center for the Built Environment (CBE)
ƒ Tour of the Occupant Indoor Environmental Quality
(IEQ) Satisfaction Survey
ƒ Recent analysis and findings
ƒ Acoustics
ƒ Thermal comfort and air quality
ƒ LEED IEQ

ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

Case studies
Examples of POE studies using the survey
Update on LEED and surveys
Wrap-up & discussion

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

1

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)
Our Mission: To improve the design, operation, and
environmental quality of buildings by providing timely,
unbiased information on building technologies and design
techniques

CBE Industry Partners
Armstrong World Industries
Arup*
California Energy Commission
Charles M. Salter Associates
CPP Inc.
Flack + Kurtz
HOK
Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
Price Industries
RTKL
Skidmore Owings and Merrill
Stantec
Steelcase

Syska Hennessy Group
Tate Access Floors*
Taylor Engineering Team:
• Taylor Engineering
• CTG Energetics
• Guttmann & Blaevoet
• Southland Industries
• Swinerton Builders
Trane
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)*
U.S. General Services Administration
(GSA)*
Webcor*
York International Corporation
*founding partner

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

2

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

CBE research programs
ƒ Indoor Environmental Quality
ƒ Envelope and Facade Systems
ƒ HVAC Systems
ƒ Controls and Information
Technology

CBE feedback loop
ƒ Finding ways to
“take the pulse” of
buildings in operation
ƒ Helping industry to
make better buildlings

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

3

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Post occupancy evaluation (POE) process
ƒ POEs rarely done by design teams
ƒ POEs may include:
ƒ Surveys of building occupants
ƒ Observations and/or interviews with building
users
ƒ Performance in terms of energy and/or water
consumption
ƒ Physical measurements (temperature,
humidity, acoustical, lighting, daylighting)

ƒ When to do a POE
ƒ Part of commissioning plan – 6 months
ƒ Post commissioning – at least 12 months

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

4

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Occupant IEQ survey
ƒ Standardized methodology for
studying building performance
from occupants’ point of view
ƒ Provide feedback to building
designers, owners, and operators
ƒ Helps us understand how
buildings perform in practice
ƒ Web format is inexpensive, fast,
allows for branching questionos,
automatic reporting, data mining
ƒ Results can be used for:
ƒ Diagnostics
ƒ Benchmarking

Survey history
te
la ’s
80
rly
ea ’s
90

ƒ ASHRAE Thermal Comfort Studies
ƒ Johnson Controls
ƒTablet-based survey
ƒLAN-based survey

id
m ’s
90

99
19

ƒ First Web-based Survey
ƒResearch projects evaluating
effectiveness of various building
attributes
ƒ U.S. General Services
Administration
ƒDeveloped current core survey,
and special-purpose modules

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

5

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Usability testing
ƒ UCB Survey Research Center
ƒFocus groups
ƒCognitive interviewing

ƒ Assessed
ƒComprehension of survey
wording
ƒScale size and aesthetics
ƒSurvey length

ƒ Core survey now highly
standardized for accurate
benchmarking

Survey implementation

Survey
notification
via email
Occupants
respond to
web-based
survey

Data sent to
SQL server
database
Results reported
online

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

6

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Survey welcome page

Objective information

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

7

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Typical survey page

Drill-down questions

Satisfaction Scale

Next
survey
topic

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

Branched to a
follow-up page
with probing
questions
regarding
nature of
dissatisfaction

8

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Typical follow-up page

Core survey
Background
Background
Location
Location

OfficeLayout
Layout
Office
Office Furnishings
Furnishings
Office
Thermal Comfort
Comfort
Thermal
Air Quality
Quality
Air
Lighting
Lighting
Acoustics
Acoustics
Clean/Maint
Clean/Maint

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

General
General
Comments
Comments

9

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Custom modules
Background
Background
Location
Location

OfficeLayout
Layout
Office

Wayfinding

Office Furnishings
Furnishings
Office

Commute

Thermal Comfort
Comfort
Thermal

Restrooms

Air Quality
Quality
Air
Lighting
Lighting

Safety/Security
etc…

Acoustics
Acoustics
Clean/Maint.
Clean/Maint.

General
General
Comments
Comments

Custom modules
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

Accessibility
Building and Grounds
Maintenance Service
Commute
Conference and Training Rooms
Court Work
Daylighting
Laboratories
Office Support Equipment
Operable Windows
Raised Floor and Floor Diffusers
Restrooms
Safety and Security
Wayfinding

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

10

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Automated reporting

Diagnosing problems

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

11

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Survey database growth
To date: 290+ buildings, nearly 39,000+ respondents
300
(Cumulative)

# building in database

350

250
200
150
100
50
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Years

Collecting building characteristics

Excerpt from building profile form

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

12

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Survey data mining tool

IEQ satisfaction trends

Source: CBE survey database as of April 15, 2006

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

13

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Acoustics analysis
ƒ “Acoustic Quality in Office Workstations, as
Assessed by Occupant Surveys,”
Jensen, K., E. Arens, and L. Zagreus, 2005
Proceedings, Indoor Air 2005, Sept. 4-9, Beijing,
China.
ƒ Studied satisfaction with acoustics in office
environments
ƒ Acoustical satisfaction lowest
category
ƒ Analyzed data from
ƒ 142 buildings
ƒ 23,450 occupants

Sound privacy vs. noise level

Overall Database Average Category Scores
Mean Satisfaction Score

3
2

Largest 15
CBE Bldgs
(N=4096)
Noise Level

1
0
-1

Sound Privacy

-2
-3

Ofc
Ofc Therm Air Q
Layout Furn

Light Acoust Clean

Gen Gen
Wspce Bldg

Survey Category

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

14

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Acoustic average satisfaction score

Acoustic quality impact on productivity

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

15

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Top sources of dissatisfaction
Of those expressing dissatisfaction with acoustics…

Rank

Source of dissatisfaction

Private
office

Shared
office

Cubicles
with high
partitions

Cubicles
with low
partitions

21%

50%

70%

83%

1

People talking on the phone

2

People overhearing private
conversations

25%

40%

65%

71%

3

People talking in surrounding
offices

15%

21%

45%

54%

4

People talking in the corridor

6%

12%

25%

27%

5

Telephones ringing

2.5%

8%

23%

31%

6

Office equipment

4%

5%

13%

14%

Key findings
ƒ Over 50% of occupants in cubicles think
acoustics interfere with their ability to get their job
done
ƒ Acoustic satisfaction will not be improved much
by making cubicles higher
ƒ Occupants in open office more satisfied with
acoustics than occupants in cubicles
ƒ Of the 9 core survey categories, acoustics
causes the greatest dissatisfaction

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

16

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Potential solutions
ƒ Acoustical consideration during design, using
consultants or “Speech Privacy Predictor” (SPP)
ƒ Focus on improving conditions for cube-dwellers
ƒ Sound masking, improved sound absorption
ƒ Lower telephone ringing volume, visual ring
ƒ Provide varied workspace options

Thermal comfort and air quality analysis
ƒ “Air Quality and Thermal Comfort in Office Buildings:
Results of a Large Indoor Environmental Quality
Survey,” Huizenga, C., S. Abbaszadeh, L. Zagreus and
E. Arens, 2006. Proceedings, Healthy Buildings 2006,
June 4-8, Lisbon, Vol. III, 393-397.
ƒ Studied satisfaction with thermal comfort, air quality,
compared to existing standards
ƒ Analyzed data from
ƒ 215 buildings
ƒ 34,169 occupants

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

17

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Thermal comfort & air quality standards
ƒ Standards define acceptable indoor environment:
“Conditions in which more than 80% of people do not
express dissatisfaction”
ƒ ASHRAE Standard 55-2004 (Thermal comfort)
ƒ ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004 (Air quality)

ƒ And others even more restrictive! (90% threshold)
ƒ ISO Standard 7730:1994 (Thermal comfort)

Top 3 (>0): satisfied

(CBE satisfaction threshold)

Top 4 (>=0): not dissatisfied

(acceptability standard)

Thermal satisfaction: 2nd lowest category

Number of respsonses

“How satisfied are you with the temperature in your
workspace?”
10,000
8,000
6,000

19%
14% 13%

15%

16% 16%

4,000
6%

2,000
-3 -2 -1
very dissatisfied

0

1

2 3
very satisfied

Overall: 42% of respondents
dissatisfied

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

18

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Distribution of thermal satisfaction

24%

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21%
15%

14% 15%

9%

100%

90-99%

80-89%

70-79%

60-69%

50-50%

40-49%

30-39%

20-29%

10-19%

1% 1%

0-9%

Number of buildingsx

11% of buildings meet acceptability standard

Percent satisfied
Percent satisfied: Top 4 points (>=0) on 7-point satisfaction scale

Sources of thermal discomfort
Source of dissatisfaction with temperature in CBE survey database
(one-person/one-vote) (total number of complaints = 32,806)
14%

My area is hotter/colder than other area

13%

Thermostat is inaccessible

13%

Thermostat is adjusted by other people
11%

Air movement too low
9%

Heating/cooling system does not respond
7%

Drafts from vents
Air movement too high

5%

Incoming sun

5%

Other

5%
4%

Humidity too high (damp)

3%

Hot/cold surrounding surfaces (floor, ce

3%

Humidity too low (dry)
Drafts from windows

3%

Heat from office equipment

3%
2%

Air coming out of vents too hot/cold
Clothing policy is not flexible

1%

Heating/cooling capacity is insufficient

1%
0%

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

5%
10%
15%
% of total thermal dissatisfaction votes

19

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Thermal controls & satisfaction
ƒ Personal control over
environmental conditions
has a positive impact on
occupant satisfaction

ƒ Personal devices that
compensate for building
conditions can indicate
dissatisfaction

% satisfied*

N

All occupants

58%

32,749

No thermostat

56%

29,313

Thermostat

76%

3,437

Difference

20%

No operable window

57%

30,018

Operable window

67%

2,732

Difference

10%

No portable heater

59%

29,435

Portable heater

44%

3,315

Difference

-15%

No portable fan

60%

25,422

Portable fan

51%

7,328

Difference

-9%

*(>=0 on the –3 to +3 satisfaction scale)

(p<0.01)

Air quality satisfaction: 3rd lowest category

Number of respsonses

“How satisfied are you with the air quality in your
workspace (i.e. stuffy/stale air, cleanliness, odors)?”

10,000
18% 19%

6,000
4,000

Among those who were
dissatisfied with their air quality,
major complaints were (in order):

23%

8,000
13%
9% 10%

8%

2,000

Air is stuffy/stale

74%

Air is not clean

67%

Air is smelling bad

51%

-3 -2 -1
very dissatisfied

0

1

2 3
very satisfied

Overall: 32% of
respondents
dissatisfied

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

20

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Distribution of air quality satisfaction

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

25%
19%

20%
15%
9%

8%

90-99%

80-89%

70-79%

60-69%

50-50%

40-49%

30-39%

20-29%

10-19%

100%

2%

1% 1%

0-9%

Number of buildingsx

26% of buildings meet acceptability standard

Percent satisfied
Percent satisfied: Top 4 points (>=0) on 7-point satisfaction scale

LEED IEQ analysis
ƒ “Occupant Satisfaction with Indoor Environmental
Quality in Green Buildings.” Abbaszadeh Fard, S., L.
Zagreus, D. Lehrer and C. Huizenga, 2006.
Proceedings, Healthy Buildings 2006, June 4-8, Lisbon,
Vol. III, 365-370.
ƒ Compared occupant satisfaction in 21 green or LEEDcertified buildings with 160 non-green buildings
ƒ Analyzed data from
ƒ 181 buildings
ƒ 33,285 occupants

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

21

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

What is “Green” Design?
Design and construction practices that significantly
reduce or eliminate the negative impact of buildings
on the environment and occupants in five broad
areas:
ƒ Sustainable site planning
ƒ Safeguarding water and water efficiency
ƒ Energy efficiency and renewable energy
ƒ Conservation of materials and resources
ƒ Indoor environmental quality

Source: Introduction to USGBC and LEED Green Rating System, 3/18/2004

Research opportunity: LEED IEQ analysis
ƒ Do LEED-rated / green buildings in fact have better
indoor environmental quality?

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

22

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

LEED-rated / green buildings in database
15 LEED-rated and 6 selfnominated buildings
160 other buildings in CBE
database
Chesapeake Bay
Foundation

NC 2 platinum

1

NC 2 gold

2

NC 2 silver

3

NC 2.1

2

NC 2 certified

1

NC 1 platinum

2

EB pilot

1

CI pilot

3

Chicago Center for
Green Technology

JohnsonDiversey Global Headquarters

NC=New Construction; EB=Existing Buildings; CI=Commercial Interiors

Self-nominated green buildings
ƒ 6 buildings identified by building design team or owner:
ƒ 2 received national AIA Top 10 Green Building Awards
ƒ 2 received Environmental Design & Construction awards
ƒ 1 received Savings by Design award
ƒ 1 received local awards

Carnegie Center for Global
Ecology

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

National Wildlife Federation

World Resources Institute

23

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Categories in LEED – NC 2.1 & EB 2.0
LEED - NC

LEED - EB

Sustainable Sites

14

14

Water Efficiency

5

5

Energy & Atmosphere

17

23

Materials & Resources

13

16

Indoor Environmental Quality

15

22

Innovation & Design Process

5

5

Total

69

85

22%

26%

% of IEQ credit points

Mapping survey categories to LEED
Survey Satisfaction categories

LEED IEQ credit categories

Office
OfficeLayout
Layout
Office
OfficeFurnishing
Furnishing
Thermal
ThermalComfort
Comfort
Air
AirQuality
Quality
Lighting
Lighting

Thermal
Thermalcomfort
comfort
Air
AirQuality
Quality
Daylight
Daylight&&views
views
Controllability
Controllabilityof
ofsystems
systems

Acoustics
Acoustics
Cleaning
Cleaning&&Maint.
Maint.
Gen.
Gen.Bldg
Bldg&&Workspace
Workspace

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

24

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

IEQ in LEED-rated/green buildings paper

(n=21)
(n=160)

Source: CBE survey database as of September 27, 2005

Percentile charts overview
Very
satisfied

Overall Satisfaction - Building
CBE Database, buildings with responses >15 (n=161)

Mean Satisfaction Score

3

Median 1.07
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

0

161 buildings
Un-weighted average: 1 bldg. = 1 vote
Approx. 28,000 occupant responses
Average response rate 49%
Median entire database

-3
8000%
600
400
Very
200
dissatisfied
0

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank

25

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Building overall: satisfaction
Overall Satisfaction - Building
LEED-rated/green (n=21) Compared to CBE Database (n=160)

Mean Satisfaction Score

3

1.47
0.93
0
Median of rest of
database

Median of LEEDrated/green
buildings

-3
0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank
Database building

LEED-rated building

Green building

Thermal Comfort: satisfaction
Overall Satisfaction - Thermal Comfort
LEED-rated/green (n=21) Compared to CBE Database (n=160)

Mean Satisfaction Score

3
Median of rest
of database

Median of
LEEDrated/green

0.36
0

-0.16

-3
0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank
Database building

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

LEED-rated building

Green building

26

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Air Quality: satisfaction
Overall Satisfaction - Air Quality
LEED-rated/green (n=21) Compared to CBE Database (n=160)

Mean Satisfaction Score

3
Median of rest
of database

Median of LEEDrated / green
buildings

1.14
0.21

0

-3
0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank
Database building

LEED-rated building

Green building

Lighting: satisfaction
Overall Satisfaction - Lighting
LEED-rated/green (n=21) Compared to CBE Database (n=160)

Mean Satisfaction Score

3

1.12
1.08
0

Median of rest
of database

Median of LEEDrated / green
buildings

-3
0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank
Database building

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

LEED-rated building

Green building

27

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Lighting complaints
Average lighting complaints in LEED-rated/green buildings (n=21)
and the rest of CBE database (n=160)
not enough daylight
Reflections in the computer screen
too dark
too bright
no task lighting
Not enough electric lighting
Too much electric lighting
Electric lighting is an undesirable
color
Shadows on the workspace
Electric lighting flickers
Other:
too much daylight
No control over sunlight/daylight
0%
Database building

20%

40%

60%

80% 100%

LEED-rated/green building

Lighting dissatisfaction comments
Building A
ƒ “task lights don’t work”
ƒ “…the only light is above the light shelf, I had to bring in my own
lamp..”

Building B
ƒ “Too bright in some places, too dark in others, and not enough
task lighting…”
ƒ “The light sensors need to be adjusted… to come on sooner.”
ƒ “Task light mounted on wrong side of workstation.”

Building C
ƒ “The lighting in my cube was woefully inadequate from day one.
The task lighting does not shine where I do my reading and
writing. Another light…lights the space behind my computer
monitor and over my telephone…”

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

28

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Lighting controls

Average lighting controls in LEED-rated/green buildings
(n=21) and the rest of CBE database (n=160)
Desk (task) light
Light switch
Window blinds or shades
None of the above
Other:
Light dimmer
0%

20%

40%

Database building

60%

80% 100%

LEED-rated/green building

Sustainable design strategies – Lighting
ƒ Common strategies include
ƒ Provide lower levels of ambient electric lighting
ƒ Rely more on daylight to conserve energy and enhance IEQ

ƒ Can result in
ƒ Thermal discomfort
ƒ Glare/reflections
ƒ Workspace too dark/bright

ƒ Lessons learned
ƒ Provide effective controls to occupants such as task lighting,
blinds and shades
ƒ Commission automated systems such as occupancy/daylight
sensors and shading systems

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

29

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Acoustics: satisfaction
Overall Satisfaction - Acoustics
LEED-rated/green (n=21) Compared to CBE Database (n=160)

Mean Satisfaction Score

3
Median of rest
of database

0

Median of LEEDrated / green
buildings

-0.20
-0.27

-3
0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank
Database building

LEED-rated building

Green building

Acoustic complaints
Average acoustic complaints in LEED-rated/green
buildings (n=21) and the rest of CBE database (n=160)
People talking in neighboring areas
People overhearing my private
conversations
People talking on the phone
telephones ringing
Mechanical (heating, cooling and
ventilation systems) noise
Office equipment noise
outdoor traffic noise
Other:
people in corridor
Office lighting noise
Excessive echoing of voices or
other sounds
0%
Database building

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
LEED-rated/green building

30

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Office type
Average distribution of office types in LEED-rated/green
buildings (n=21) and the rest of CBE database (n=160)
Cubicles with low partitions (lower
than five feet high)
Cubicles with high partitions (about
five or more feet high)
Enclosed office, private
Workspace in open office with no
partitions (just desks)
Other:
Enclosed office, shared with other
people
Cubicles with partitions of different
heights
0%
Database building

20%

40% 60%

80% 100%

LEED-rated/green building

Acoustics dissatisfaction comments
Building A (96% open office, n=703)
ƒ “Desks too close…everyone can hear
everything. Even a tiny sneeze.”
ƒ “You can hear noises emanating 20 to
25 feet away. There is no sound
deadening effect from the cubicle
walls and the floor always sounds like
a herd of elephants is doing a ballet.”

Building B (97% open office, n=173)
ƒ “…obnoxious neighbors who think
they are the only ones on the block.”
ƒ “No one can ever hear my radio even
though I think it's turned up loud.”
ƒ … I'm a loud talker and I'm sure I
disturb other people…”

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

31

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Conclusions: LEED IEQ analysis
ƒ LEED-rated / green buildings had
significantly higher satisfaction scores in:
ƒ building overall
ƒ indoor air quality
ƒ thermal comfort

ƒ LEED-rated / green buildings did not have
higher scores in:
ƒ lighting
ƒ acoustics

ƒ No clear relationship found between LEED
credit points and occupant satisfaction with
IEQ
ƒ LEED rating by itself does not guarantee
better IEQ

Case studies
Very
satisfied

Overall Satisfaction - Building
LEED & GREEN (n=20) Compared to CBE Database (n=161)

Chesapeake
Chesapeake
Bay
Bay
Foundation
Foundation

Mean Satisfaction Score

3

Johnson
Johnson
Diversey
Diversey

0

Carnegie
Carnegie
Center
Center

-3
0%

25%

Very
dissatisfied

50%

75%

100%

Percentile Rank
LEED-certified bldg.

Non-green bldg.

Self-nominated green bldg.

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

32

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Case study: Chesapeake Bay Foundation
ƒ First LEED-certified Platinum (version 1.0), completed in 2001
ƒ 5 of 7 possible IEQ points (36 of 52 total possible points)
ƒ Numerous sustainable features
ƒ DOE-sponsored field study conducted by Judith Heerwagen, used
extended version of occupant survey, interviews and observations

Heerwagen, J. and L. Zagreus, “The Human Factors of Sustainability: A Post Occupancy
Evaluation of the Philip Merrill Environmental Center.” April 2005

Case study: Chesapeake Bay Foundation

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

33

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Case study: Carnegie Center for Global Ecology
ƒ Stanford campus, Palo Alto, CA
ƒ Clients understood green
building priorities, did not rely
on LEED
ƒ Selected design team with
extensive green building
experience
ƒ Designed to beat California
energy code by 57%
ƒ IEQ features include
daylighting, radiant heating and
cooling, natural ventilation with
operable windows

Case study: Carnegie Center for Global Ecology
ƒ High marks overall
ƒ Acoustical score
puts building in top
quartile
ƒ 83% in open office,
no partitions

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

34

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Case study: JohnsonDiversey
ƒ Survey client: JohnsonDiversey
ƒ 2 buildings surveyed
ƒ One LEED-EB certified
ƒ The other not LEED certified

ƒ Core survey plus washrooms
and security modules

JohnsonDiversey Headquarters – LEED-EB pilot (gold)

JohnsonDiversey survey results
Certified building performed significantly better than the
non-certified building in nearly every category

Non LEED certified building

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

LEED certified building

35

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

JohnsonDiversey survey results, cont’d
Operational applications resulting from the study
ƒ Certified building
ƒ Continue IAQ and other management programs

ƒ Non-certified building
ƒ Instituted new cleaning and lighting programs to align with
LEED standard
ƒ Plans improvements to HVAC, lighting and acoustics

ƒ Both buildings
ƒ Numerous “low hanging fruit” fixes
ƒ Comments a rich source of information

POE Applications: HOK
ƒ HOK Process
1. CBE occupant satisfaction survey
2. Energy evaluation
3. Interviews

ƒ Customized survey questions
ƒ Solar control
ƒ Automated lighting controls
ƒ Occupancy sensors
ƒ Building recycling program

ƒ 9 buildings included
Images: HOK

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

36

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

POE Applications: HOK

Source: Sandra Mendler, AIA, HOK

POE Applications: HOK
ƒ Summary of POEs identified:
ƒ Workplace
ƒ Conservation of resources
ƒ Placemaking & values

ƒ What’s working
ƒ Room for improvement
Occupant comments:
“There’s not a day that goes by that
I take these working conditions for
granted...”
“I feel like a rat in a cage,...
Otherwise everything’s fine.
Thank you for asking my opinion.”

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

Source: Sandra Mendler, AIA, HOK

37

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

HOK POE outcomes
ƒ Disseminated findings in
guidebook
ƒ Presentations to AIA membership,
Green building confessions
ƒ Motivate industry to conduct POEs
ƒ Assist design of future projects
ƒ Fosters closer relationship with clients
ƒ Raise awareness of need to focus on
issues like daylighting
ƒ Study anticipated vs. actual energy use
ƒ Show importance of building
commissioning

Southwestern B.C. study
ƒ Detailed studies of five green
buildings in SW British
Columbia
ƒ Led by Greater Vancouver
Regional District, Green
Buildings BC, and Stantec
(Keen)
ƒ Completed Nov. 2004
ƒ Project led to the development
of building performance
evaluation (BPE) protocol now
in development with Stantec
and the EcoSmart Foundation

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

38

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Southwestern B.C. study

Source: Stantec

LEED – NC 2.2 updates thermal comfort credits
Previous version LEED – NC 2.1
ƒ Credit 7.1 (Comply w/ ASHRAE 55-1992)
ƒ Credit 7.2 (Permanent monitoring system)
New version LEED – NC 2.2 (November 2005)
ƒ Credit 7.1 (Comply w/ ASHRAE 55-2004)
ƒ Credit 7.2 (Verification)

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

39

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

IEQ Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort: Verification
“Agree to implement a thermal comfort survey of
building occupants within a period of six to 18
months after occupancy.
This survey should collect anonymous responses
about thermal comfort in the building including an
assessment of overall satisfaction with thermal
performance and identification of thermal
comfort-related problems.
Agree to develop a plan for corrective action if the
survey results indicate that more than 20% of
occupants are dissatisfied…”

Additional resources
ƒ CBE Publications Page:
http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/research/publications.htm
ƒ Environmental Building News, Volume 12, Number 9,
September 2003
(available free from BuildingGreen.com)
ƒ Federal Facilities Council, Technical Report 145,
“Learning from our buildings: a state-of-the-practice
summary of post-occupancy evaluation” (2001)
ƒ Mendler, S., W. Odell, M. A. Lazarus
“The HOK Guidebook to Sustainable Design” (2006)

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

40

LEED Post-Occupancy Evaluation:
Taking Responsibility for the Occupants

November 1-2, 2006

Questions/discussion
David Lehrer
lehrer@berkeley.edu
Survey demo
http://www.cbesurvey.org
Center for the Built Environment
http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu
Survey researcher wanted!
http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/jobs

Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

41



Source Exif Data:
File Type                       : PDF
File Type Extension             : pdf
MIME Type                       : application/pdf
PDF Version                     : 1.4
Linearized                      : Yes
XMP Toolkit                     : 3.1-701
Producer                        : Acrobat Distiller 7.0.5 (Windows)
Creator Tool                    : PScript5.dll Version 5.2.2
Modify Date                     : 2006:11:03 15:48:37-08:00
Create Date                     : 2006:11:03 15:48:37-08:00
Format                          : application/pdf
Title                           : Microsoft PowerPoint - CBE_Survey_betterBricks.ppt
Creator                         : lehrer
Document ID                     : uuid:ca793810-52da-47bc-8d9f-eec499029863
Instance ID                     : uuid:91f7d28c-cc6b-42b7-a460-d7056ad08cc0
Page Count                      : 41
Author                          : lehrer
EXIF Metadata provided by EXIF.tools

Navigation menu