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 ------- |