United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5306W)
EPA-530-F-00-001e
June 2000
www.epa.gov/osw
1
Ridgehaven Green
Office Building
San Diego, CA
51% Reduction of Renovation Materials
When the City of San Diego's Environmental Services Department (ESD)
renovated the Ridgehaven Office Building into a green building it required
that its general contractor divert materials for reuse. The ESD and the city diverted
51% of renovation debris, saved over $93,000, lengthened the life of the local landfill, and
showed that cities can help meet California's AB 939 law through the recovery of
construction and demolition material. The general contractor also learned that material
diversion makes sense. Despite its initial reluctance to follow the reuse and recycling
procedures in the project specifications, the company now recovers materials on all
construction projects.
Project Description
In 1994 the City of San Diego's Environmental
Services Department (ESD), which manages
the city's trash and recycling, expanded its office
space by purchasing the Ridgehaven Office
Building. The department decided to renovate
the office structure as a Green Building
Demonstration Project, requiring (1) the use of
green building materials (containing recycled
content or recyclable) and (2) the reduction,
recycling, and reuse of all possible
renovation materials. ESD was encouraged
to divert materials because of AB 939,
California's law which requires all state
municipalities to reduce their waste by 50%
by the year 2000. ESD's ownership of
the city landfill was an additional
incentive to reduce construction and
demolition disposal from the project.
During the renovation, the
general contractor removed all
internal components, such as
furniture, window blinds, doors and
assemblies, gypsum panels from
interior walls, and acoustical ceiling
panels. Crews then stored these
materials for refurbishment and
reinstallation.
The general contractor
recovered other materials through
recycling and salvaging. Crew members hand-
sorted recyclables into bins and took them to
nearby processors. Workers also removed 3,700
square yards of carpet, 450 light fixtures, and 60
mechanical heat pumps. Salvaging companies
then removed salvageable materials for reuse by
others, saving the city removal, hauling, and
tipping fees.
The general contractor's reluctance to
recycle was initially an obstacle to materials
recovery. The project specifications included
requirements, developed by the environmental
consulting architect, for the salvage and reuse of
building materials and the recycling of
construction debris. Project facilitators (ESD, the
project architect, and the environmental
consulting architect) worked together to assure
Materials Collected
Recycled
scrap metal, concrete, wood
(including pallets), cardboard,
ceramic toilet fixtures, gypsum
wallboard.and cellulose insulation
Reused On-Site
wall panels, acoustical ceiling panels,
doors (including frames, thresholds,
and hardware), wall coverings, and
cabinets and shelves
Salvaged for Reuse
carpet, light fixtures, and mechanical
heat pumps
-------
that the contractor followed these
specifications. As part of this joint effort,
BSD labeled site dumpsters for recycling,
clearly identifying them for separate
materials.
Another difficulty encountered during
the project was the theft of recyclables
from the site. These thefts served to
illustrate the value of recyclable materials.
Costs/Benefits
Traditionally, debris from most
renovation projects are disposed in
landfills. BSD, however, saved $93,000 by
diverting 51% of the materials removed
during their renovation of the Ridgehaven
Green Office Building. This savings
convinced the general contractor to
practice recycling on future projects.
Planning costs were incurred for
developing the environmental procedures,
Project Summary
Date Started 1994
Date Completed 1996
Project Square Footage 73,000
Total Waste Generated (Tons) 366.0
Disposed (Tons) 180.0
Total Materials Diverted (Tons) 186.0
Recycled 80.1
Reused On-Site 62.3
Salvaged for Later Reuse 43.6
Total Materials Diverted 51 %
Disposal Tip Fee ($/ton)
Landfill $43
Materials Diversion Costs
Planning and Development $13,500
Labor " $13,500
Hauling and Tip Fees $0
Revenue/Savings from Materials
Diversion
Materials Sales $1,250
Materials Reuse On-Site $68,800
Materials Salvage $15,000
Avoided Disposal $8,000
Avoided Hauling $13,500
Subcontracting Fees $13,500
Cost/(Savings) from Diversion ($93,050)
Cost/(Savings) per Square Foot ($1.27)
Notes: Figures may not add to total due to
rounding. Lynn Froeschle estimated materials
diversion costs, savings from avoided hauling, and
savings from avoided subcontracting fees as a
percentage of the total project costs.
which addressed the reuse,
salvaging, and recycling of
renovation materials;
educating and training the
general contractor,
subcontractors, and crew; and
checking to assure that the
project's environmental
specifications were followed.
During the project, additional
labor was required to remove,
refurbish and reinstall the
wall panels, ceiling tiles, doors
and door frames, and window
blinds. Source separating
recyclables also required
more labor than simply
throwing all renovation materials into one
container. Neither the contractor nor ESD
paid any fees to haul or tip recyclables.
ESD offset the labor, hauling, and
planning costs for the materials recovery
program with a $68,800 savings in avoided
materials purchases on the Ridgehaven
project, the salvage of $15,000 worth of
components for use in later projects, over
$1,200 in materials revenue, and $21,500 in
avoided hauling and disposal fees. The
general contractor refurbished and reused
many materials, such as wall panels, doors
and assemblies, and ceiling tiles, at a lower
cost than purchasing new items. The city
received materials revenue from the sale of
28 tons of scrap metal ($1,136) and 4 tons
of cardboard ($113). The contractor also
saved by avoiding the removal, hauling,
and tipping of 3,700 square yards of carpet
($10,000); 450 light fixtures ($3,000); and
60 mechanical heat pumps ($2,000), which
were salvaged for off-site reuse.
Furthermore, total subcontractor costs
were $13,500 lower than projected as a
result of the waste reduction efforts.
Tips for Replication
• Ensure that the client, the design
team, and the contractor share the same
environmental goals.
• Identify all possible recyclable and
reusable materials prior to renovation.
• Include environmental procedures in
the project specifications that address
construction materials reuse and recycling.
Building.
• Require the contractor to develop a
construction recycling plan that
compliments the project specifications.
• Host a pre-construction meeting and
site meetings early in the
construction process in
order to educate the
contractor and workers on
the benefits of materials
recovery.
Client:
City of San Diego
Environmental Services
Department
9601 Ridgehaven Court
San Diego, California 92123
Contact: Lisa Wood
Phone: 858-573-1236
Architect of Record
Platt/Whitelaw Architects, Inc.
3953 Goldfinch
San Diego, California 92117-4730
Contact: Alison M.Whitelaw, AIA
Phone: 619-260-1818
Environmental Consulting Architect
Lynn Froeschle, AIA, Architects
4472 Mount Herbert Avenue
San Diego, California 92117-4730
Contact: Lynn M. Froeschle, AIA, CSI
Phone: 858-571-2858 Fax: 858-571-7073
E-mail: LFroeschle@aol.com
General Contractor
Soltek Pacific, Inc.
2424 Congress Street, Suite A
San Diego, California 92110
Contact: Neal Jellison
Phone: 619-296-6247
------- |