Page 64 - Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings-Volume 2

CASE STUDY NO. 9 SPECULATIVE OFFICE BUILDING AT 435 INDIO WAY
Speculative Office Building at 435 Indio Way
Case Study No. 9
Data Summary
Building Type: Office
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Gross Floor Area: 31,759 gsf
Occupied: May 2014
Energy Modeling Software:
EnergyPlus 7.2
Modeled EUI (Site):
21.2 kBtu/sf-year
Measured EUI (Site):
13.5 kBtu/sf-year (Oct 2014 — Sept 2015)
On-Site Renewable Energy System Installed:
113.2 kW (DC) Solar PV
Measured On-Site Energy Production:
266,000 kWh/year
28.6 kBtu/sf-year (Oct 2014 — Sept 2015)
Measured Solar Thermal Production:
500 kWh/year
0.1 kBtu/sf-year (May 2014 — June 2015)
Client/Developer
Sharp Development Company
Owner
Huettig & Schromm, Inc.
Design Team
Architect: RMW Architects, San Jose, CA
Structural Engineer: SEI (Struc- tural Engineers Inc)
Mechanical/Electrical Engineer:
Integral Group, Oakland, CA
Lighting Design: Integral Group, Oakland, CA
Master System Integrator:
Intertie Automation
General Contractor
Hillhouse Construction Company
52
Case Study No. 9, the Speculative Office Building at 435 Indio Way in Sunnyvale, California, is the third renovation project in the set of successful zero-net-energy case study buildings docu- mented in this Volume 2. Like Case Study No. 8, the IBEW-NECA JATC Training Center, this project is also the renovation of an existing one-story tilt-up concrete building in a suburban of- fice park and therefore very interesting to compare1. These two buildings are essentially of the same vintage and construction, and are located in similar microclimate areas, thus providing the opportunity to compare design approach and the basis of decision-making.
The principal differences between the two case study buildings are programmatic use—educa- tion versus general office use—and the types of financial criteria established for decision-making about low-energy design features and systems.
As noted in Case Study No. 8, every such design feature for that project was individually evalu- ated on a life-cycle cost basis, with the underlying accepted objective that the building would be designed for ZNE. Features with relatively high life cycle cost were not accepted; for example, even wall insulation was not selected because of the relatively low impact on energy savings combined with the relatively high cost of retrofit installation.
For Case Study No. 9, on the other hand, the financial criteria were strict but general: the total return on investment for the ZNE design as a whole was required to be greater than that of a code-minimum building design. The ZNE design simply had to be a better financial investment than a code-minimum building by the standard metrics of real estate development.
The developer and owners of the building wished to develop a ZNE prototype design for a com- mon project-type in their real estate market, the concrete tilt-up in an office park, and to test the market with it. They believed (and wanted to confirm) that the ZNE design could be shown to produce just as much or even more profit when compared with a code-minimum design despite potentially higher first cost for the ZNE design. Savings and added value in other financial areas due to the ZNE design would theoretically make up any difference in first cost or would even increase the profitability bottom line.
Because of the importance of this concept of financial investment in ZNE design, details of the financial comparisons done by the developer for this building are discussed in a special sidebar in this particular case study.
All three of these case studies in Volume 2 (Nos. 7, 8 and 9) indicate that renovation projects for buildings of this type and in comparable locations are highly feasible candidates for zero net energy performance under typical types of financial constraints.
Background
The approximately 30,000 sq. ft., one-story building, built in the 1970’s when energy standards were just being launched in California, is owned by Huettig & Schromm, Inc., a property manage- ment company in Palo Alto. The partners were particularly interested in renovating the building so that it would be zero net energy and they involved Sharp Development Company to realize that objective. Both parties believed that there was an exceptional market for this type of building space in their geographic area and they wished to test this idea.
1 See also Case Study No. 3, IDeAs Office Building, in Volume 1 of Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings. This project was also a renovation of a one-story tilt-up concrete building in a sub- urban setting, though of a much smaller size. Additional comparisons among these renovation projects are instructive.
Zero Net Energy Case Study Buildings: Volume 2