to target more points than the minimum threshold because there's a whole review process that goes on throughout design and construction with USGBC and GBCI and sometimes things happen we lose credits
or criteria points through something that happens during construction or through a review through GBCI um through the third party review um but per our early assessment, you know, gold
is achievable. The the challenge with platinum as it used to be with um as it used to be with um the platinum under lead V4 is that the difference between silver and gold is 10 points whereas the difference between gold and platinum is
20 points and that means you have to target 20 plus points to get to platinum and it gets it gets a bit more challenging. Next, the one additional thing that we have in terms of the lead
V5 platinum is that USGBC has added additional requirement on top of the 80 points. So the um building has to be fully electrified which means um you know basically no fossil fuel and so
there's sort of a bit of a red flag there with the platinum in depending on what happens with the pool and we would have to follow up again as we're doing with the incentives with Massave where they have a a rule about you know having
natural gas on site Uh GBCI also has a set of rules as to what's acceptable. So we we'd have to follow up there. Maximize energy efficiency. So you have to have the 24% savings over the Afrey 90.1
baseline and that's through a lead energy analysis that is not the typical energy analysis. They have their own set of rules and their review sometimes is cumbersome. Um and but we have to go through that anyway. We usually get the
24% on our projects. Um but uh it's a bit different here with Ashray, the 2019 version of of Ashray. 100% renewable energy. So that means full net zero installed. Um and 20%
reduction in embodied carbon. Um and that's I think that's a target that we usually strive for in our projects. Uh but again with the new version five um there's a lot of new criteria that uh
and interpretation of that criteria uh we have to understand that we're going to be in a learning curve here as the reviewers for GBCI are starting to review those V5 versions and by the time we get to the reviews you know it's
still early in the process processing of this new version. Next, >> Martine, let me just add in on the fully electrified point. You had mentioned the pool building. Um there's also the topic that came up at one of our prior meetings of um the instructional gas used for both the CTE programs that may
require it as well as the potential for science labs. >> So, we have Yeah. So, we have learned since that the local um utilities, the incentive programs do have exceptions u for vocational programs and for science labs. So we can we can have those
conversations with the instructors when we get to our programming meetings um in the fall and understand a little bit more about what their needs are. Um but we can include it there and still preserve the potential for maximizing our incentives. Right. >> Um I think what you were alluding to is we also have a separate track that we
have to sort of convince or make sure that that USGBC has that same understanding um when it comes to the lead sort of platinum certification and this this requirement for full electrification. So there there's more to um sort out there, but I just wanted to sort of provide that quick update
from what we talked about previously. >> Yeah, that that's a great that's a great point to make because GBCI may not be as open to as as open with exceptions as the incentive programs are. >> Yeah. >> So just want to bring that up that that
Yeah. >> Um >> we'll try to reason with them though. >> Right. Right. And and also when thinking about labs and natural gas, there's also the health component to it because when you have natural gas, it's been proven even with the cooking, you know, that
there's the health component, but that's a discussion with the instructor and that's going to be their decision. Um, but it's nice to see that the incentives have sort of addressed it. Um, so we're going to go we're going to go through each of the categories now. um
integrated process. So this in what you're what you're going to see in these slides, you're going to see the V5 on top and the V4 in the bottom. And then we have also an explanation of of what's different. So in this one category, this was sort of a a fairly easy point and
before um it's just following through the integrative process and and u documenting it into a specific template that's set by GBCI. Um and so this was a point we would get um in the new version
we have three more prerequisites. So those are mandated and they're new and then that integrative design process has been modified as well. Um so all of these carbon climate resilience human impact and carbon
assessments are going to be starting to be documented and looked into as part of the design process. um you know from now to schemat schematic design up to up to CD uh up to end of CDs and there may be
some components of those um that will involve uh you know the uh the the the district participation the school participation. Next, in terms of the location and transportation,
um, excuse me, most of the, uh, credits have the some of the credits have been combined or modified. So, there's a there's less um, and there's a bit of less points. So for example
uh the if you look at the V4 below where I have the the green circle um surrounding density and diversity use and access to quality transit. So together those are nine points for schools that are on a main uh main
street or near urban areas. Um these two points get you know you us these two credits usually gets a high score of points. Uh unfortunately the location of Medford um the Medford high school uh
makes it really hard to get points there from the start even in V4. I just want to mention that um we are looking at the new version and we're also looking at um you know the bus trips is the big is the
big thing with the um the quality transit um which is the LTC3 the compact and connected development um so there's going to be more conversation about those um the one other is the electric vehicles
so it used to 5% before, now it's five and 10%, but in order to get to gold, we need to do the 10% installed. In this case, it's not a big issue because you have a requirement for 20% from what I'm understanding. Um,
so that is the I don't know why it says 4% here. There's a typo. Um, it should be 5%. So that's uh location and transportation. As we go through the design, as the parking options are being developed, as the site options are being
developed, we look into this criteria and make sure and see what you know what is needed to optimize the compliance to these credits. Next, in terms of sustainable sites, um
there's a couple of new um the there's a lot of there's a lot of credits here. So, we have the comparison on the next slide, the full comparison. Uh but most of the um most of the credits have been modified.
And then we have a couple of new credits. Enhance resilient site design is one which addresses site resiliency which you know your site is already addressing this at many levels. Um heat island reduction is a combination of
white membrane roof and uh you know as much reflect as much light colored paving as as possible. And these require early calculations. When when we start schematic design, we start some of these calculation to see how we're doing. And
it it's integrated as part of the decision process as to um you know when we when you discuss um materials and areas of parking and location of parkings etc.
Uh next. So this gives you a bit of the the the changes to the site assessment which was um is now required as part of the prerequisite. It used to be a point and we did it on every project. Um joint use
of facilities which was very very uh convenient for uh school projects for lead certification is no longer a credit. That was a that was another easy point. Sitem plan is no no longer a credit. There is an opportunity for a uh
the bird friendly glass offers an opportunity for extra point. That's something we may want to discuss. Um and then um access to outdoor space is a new credit. We just talked about those two next.
So we wanted to give you a bit of a flavor of you know what all what what are all those credits and what do they mean accessible outdoor space rainwater management enhanced resilience site ei reduction so for example outdoor
learning classrooms which we're going to be looking as part of this project bio swelles which we're going to be looking as part of this project those contribute to pretty much all of those credits
um you know the roof and the bio swell do reduce and help manage the rainwater. They help reduction of heat island reduction as well. The light colored pavers on those you know outdoor classroom surfaces um they help for the
heat island reduction. Um in Somerville we did a demo rainwater harvesting system for the um science program. Um so there's some of these concept we can you know look and think about especially for
the city programs. Next um water efficiency. So once again um there's one less uh uh one less um prerequisite but they basically they bundled um they
bundle them. Um and then they also bundle the water efficiency. They bundle the indoor and the outdoor together. Um so there's there's these credits were modified. the water metering was modified a bit as well and some of the credits went went
away. Um so that's that's it in a nutshell for this one. Um so there's less points overall in that in that category um compared to V4. Next. All right. Energy and atmosphere. So there's more prerequisites than V4. V4
is on the other slide because it was it was too much. So, we'll we'll talk about it in a minute, but this is focused on everything that has to do with uh your building systems, including the building enclosure and renewable energy. Um, as
well as your system being connected to the grid. Um, so what's new here is they're asking for an operational carbon projection and the carbonization plan. So we have to do a carbon analysis
upfront which we kind of do as part of the MSBA process to a certain extent. So we'll be doing that and some of the uh LCCA that we're going to do is going to address this. Um and then uh everything that has to do with energy analysis
falls into here. It's a different energy analysis. Like I said earlier, it's their requirements are a bit different than the one we do for code for the Massachusetts code. Um energy metering and reporting. So uh there this involves
the owner. It's about um the main energy meters in the project, but also you sign a commitment to report to USGBC your annual your annual energy use. um the refrigerants as part of the HVAC
system. And then what's new in V5 is electrification and that's all electric heating and cooling which is the type of system we're looking into here. Again, that doesn't mean we're going to get the five points because it's specific to lead versus what we're going to end up
here. If we have fossil fuel, it may impact um this credit. Um and then reduce peak thermal loads. That's also a new um a new credit and it'll be interesting to see how with with the all
electric very efficient all electric and potentially ground source uh heat pump system that we're looking into here. How um this is all going to impact um the peak thermal loads on top of the highly
insulated and and robust and airtight enclosure we have. So there's going to be we're definitely going to be trying to pursue this this credit, but as you can see here, you know, we're looking at, you know, there's five points for electrification, but because of the
we're we're way too early now to assess, you know, if we're going to make the five or three. So we have some in the may. Same with the peak load. um for enhanced energy efficiency uh we're being conservative too but
we're obviously we're you know targeting a high I mean a low EI a high efficiency um high performance buildings again one of the challenges that we'll see here is you know how the fact that this is a CTE
program school and how that's going to impact the overall um peak loads and and and energy uh renewable energy energ we're going to look into solar PV. So that's going to impact, you know, and
contribute to this. Again, some of these have all been most of these have been modified from from the V4. Um, in V4, you know, it was if you did a, you know, a good amount of PV, it was fairly
excess, you know, it was fairly feasible to get, you know, the renewable the three to five renewable energy points. Here it's it's another set of of criteria commissioning that's MSBA
mandated. Um and we do we still are looking at the fundamental commissioning which requires the schematic design component. Um and then grid interactive that there were basically that's a
reorganization of the demand response credit um that was in um the V4. Um, and my understanding and we're going to have to have a bit more discussion around this, but um
there's really good um there's a really good national grid program. You may already be participating in it and it's about making a plan and uh um you know uh committing to the program. I think
with the addition of the solar PV and battery storage, um there's much more here that's going to be beneficial on top of getting this credit in terms of of revenues and and savings. Um and then enhanced refrigerant management. That's
always kind of tricky depending on the type of systems you go with. If if there's it's it's you know minimizing the amount of refrigerant in the building. Um I think between the CTE program and where we land on the HVAC
uh we may not be able to do the two points. So what I have at the bottom of the slide there is sort of our goal in terms of the EUI the KBTU per square foot per year. Um we think that your um
the schools with the target is 30 to 35. you know, most nonCTE high school will go from 25 to 30, but because you have all the CTE program, it's a little bit higher. Um, and how do we get there?
Well, it's about optimizing the passive strategies. I know there's been discussion about the different options and and that may have been folded in the discussion. the super insulated enclosure, robust and airtight enclosure that's got a huge impact into your
loads. Triple glazing, all electric HVAC, plug load management, and renewable energy. all together this will um well the renewable energy is not accounted for in the in the EU but all of this is going to contribute to one
the low energy consumption of your building and two renewable energy that's going to uh offset your your grid consumption. Next, >> just before I jump to the next slide, I was wondering if you could um just
reconfirm. I may have missed it, but this first column of circles and why some are solid and some are open as we go through there. >> Can you just remind us sort of what those mean as as just a graphic convention? >> Those are comparing to lead v4. So, the
new requirements show the credits and the prerequisites that were not in lead v4. and the the the circles the the the empty dots those are the the
prerequisites and the credits that were modified from lead v4. So as you can see in this category there's nothing that's from lead v4 exactly that it's all different. >> Got it. Okay. And because I opened the
door to ask a question and I saw Luke put his hand up as well. I'm just gonna give Luke the opportunity to ask a question here as well. >> Great. Thanks, Matt. Uh, so this is to Martin um and and to Matt. Um, in terms of uh PB and offsetting um uh I'll say
like uh operational uh usage costs, what is a ballpark for this subcommittee to keep in our minds as a feasible target? Um before you answer that, um when I went to visit Arlington, um they described a plan that was phased uh with
an initial deployment um that was going to be later uh augmented with additional panels and I believe their end target was uh an offset of about 30% of their um anticipated electric load. Are those the kinds of numbers we should
anticipate or should we anticipate something else over? Um we are going to show you what what is in uh sort of what is needed for probably more than 30%. Um usually our
solar um PV assessments look at 50 and 100%. Um we're going to look at your site capacity um because you have a higher EUI and you'll see in my next slide I'll talk a little bit more about that. There there's a slide on solar, so I'll
probably answer your questions a bit more about that. Uh, but we're going to look above 30%. Yes. Um, we think your site has a capacity for for a bit more than that. >> Yeah. And there's an interesting um connectivity there, Luke, in terms of
the eventual site solution that we end up with for parking. Um because if if we have atgrade parking um that's a real great fertile opportunity to install PV panels over the top of um but if we're putting fields over the entirety of our
parking um we sort of lose that opportunity and we're forced to look elsewhere and think elsewhere um on the site because our our roof surface will not be able to provide um anywhere near the 100% of um electrical capacity generation um from the PV panels. Um, so
we'll need to look on the site and so we we don't know um sort of the full resolution of that yet. Um but as we get to the point of evaluating sort of the pros and the cons of um sort of our parking approach um we'll want to take that into account as well
>> and and we have started to have discussion with our um solar consultant about this so they can start looking at the I believe the a couple of the preferred options the ones that differ with the parking. So, we've started
engaging and uh we hope to have something to um to share fairly soon hopefully. Um next. Okay, you are next. You did you did it Matt. So basically in V4
the the threshold for the savings we're talking about 24% like our our V4 projects that were all electric in the past seven eight years would get into
the 35 to 45% savings over that Ashray baseline because it was the V4 at Ashray 2010. um if you had registered the project before 2024 20 uh 20 I forgot they did an update in
2022 maybe but um now we're the the the uh threshold is ashray 2019 or 2022 we've actually ran uh for other projects we ran comparison between the two ashrays there there's not a big difference actually between the two
which is probably why they give the choice um but that threshold is much higher than the 2010. So those 40% savings may be much lower and um uh and then equivalent to points you
know we used to get pretty much the 16 14 to 16 points in V4 but in V5 there's actually less points and then we also need to be at this time to be conservative. Um
we talked about electrification and reduce uh peak load. We talked about the commitment um for commissioning and the demand and response. So we we've addressed that. Before we go to the other category, I don't know if there's any other questions. I'm I'm happy for this section. We can take maybe a few
minutes if if needed >> and I'm happy to go back and forth between the two since there's a lot here different slides. Yeah, the uh like as you can see the energy efficiency is just 10 points, you know, and it used to
be 16. So again, more challenging to get to the 80 points of platinum and and if you don't have question and you something comes up later, we'll go through everything and then we can
circle back. I did just want to mention that there's a little bit of back and forth in the chat as well, which is great if people want to use that to have um a little bit of dialogue as we keep going. Um there was just some commentary there about um
Arlington and sort of the presence of a PPA being used um for the installation of the photovoltaic system there. Um and so that's something that we will get into as well. Um, I think it probably plays in less to the the credits um that
we're going to achieve through lead and it's more going to play into sort of the the financial realities of how the PV system is afforded and installed. Um, definitely something that we um need to to circle around on and that we'll make clear in the cost estimating um options
that come up um for those for the photovoltaic panels. But uh just so folks are aware of that. I think that's true, right Martin? That >> absolutely JBC is agnostic on PPA versus purchase, right? >> Uh there not totally agnostic but
they've they've adapted the the credit to you know allow both but PPAs they they have a certain set of criteria for PPA like there's a minimum contract year and that type of stuff. Um, but they've
they've they've improved it so that it could be one or the other. And we're going to assess both and we're going to show you the impact of both, not only in terms of lead, but also in terms as as Matt said in terms of financials, the upfront cost, but also when you own the
system, you also get advantage uh higher advantage of of directs. You you can sell you you have potential annual revenues. whereas a PPA they'll hold all of that for themselves. So um so that
those things are going to be important for your you know uh your team to consider in terms of deciding which way to go. Um so I think that's it. Let's go to um
I saw a question about there was another question. Hold on now I forgot. There was the PPA and >> and just the the fact that Arlington does not have has neither PT programs nor a pool. Right. >> Exactly. Yeah.
>> Drive up the EUI um a bit. >> So a bit a bit more about um you know solar um a lot of projects go with you know sort of the more affordable low angled uh low roof PV. Um there's
parking area. We we talked about this. We could do parking canopies whether it's on the ground canopy or on a parking garage, but if you have the the sports field on top of the parking garage, it may get a little bit more
complicated to do a canopy there. We we also um you know, we can also look at um high canopy on roof um in over HVAC, etc. Um and and we've done that in other
projects. Um there's, you know, outdoor classroom learning. There could be patio sort of uh areas. And then there's also building mounted what we call BIPV uh awnings on wall and roof screens. The
vertical ones are not as um you know, they're not as as as um efficient as the right angled um PV systems. The the gist of it is that with the EUI35, the amount of energy that um the building at the
current square footage would be uh planned to uh use uh we're talking about a 6.2 to 6.5 megawatt at 100% net zero. So um if you want the whole site to be
net zero, that's sort of the range we're looking at. And of course, we're in PSR right now, so we're going to, you know, follow through the design progress and uh look to sort of massage this a little bit. Uh but that's sort of the big ballpark range here. And those are the
numbers we brought up to um massive and the utility in terms of planning. Next, those are examples of some of our projects. uh on the left is um parking canopies and then uh at the Lincoln
school and then on on the right we we have done in some of our projects we have done demo projects we talked we showed the rainwater harvesting this is a a bit older but it's it's a Quincy high school which was in the early uh
2010 era um where we did a where they had a CTE program and and we work with the CTE teachers and we had like a small wind turbine and we had a small solar thermal um demo system there. Um and they ended up putting PV on the roof as
well. Next. So the materials and resource category um a lot of this is around um reduction, reuse, um recycling and recycle content of
materials as well as um the content of material in terms of of the the healthy materials criteria. uh low emitting materials used to be in the indoor air quality and it's now in
this category. Um so all of those um there's a couple of new ones there again embodied carbon used to be a credit and by doing the analysis and achieving certain threshold you would get points you add three to five points under V4.1
um but here uh it's a there's a prerequisite in terms of doing the analysis um there's also a uh new well the modified modified uh recycling program is now the
zerowaste operation. You need to do a planning for zero waste operation. That's going to involve us discussing with you your with your current or your current uh waste stream uh management is for the school and how this the new
school project would go for and then the planning for zero waste in the future. um building materials and and reuse that's also a new credit. um embodied carbon. So you could still get by reducing body carbon there's a set of
threshold you could still get points there and we're going to talk much more about this in the next in in schematic design. uh low emitting material that's pretty much there's a bit of modification they moved it around uh but it's it's pretty much equivalent to lead
V4 and we usually target most of the points but the process through going through procurement and construction so we have one point in the yes one point in the maybe because of that because there's always things that happen we always are mindful of the three equals
because we you know the whole approach here is not to add cost, right? All of this is applying to your project design on budget um building uh product selection procurement. So that's new. That
includes uh redlist materials which we've applied on other projects. That used to be more of a uh innovative point in in the previous lead V4 um because it's borrowed from another um green building standard that's called living
building challenge. Um and then construction demolition waste. We always target 95% diversion goal. Um this has been modified again a bit. Um, and usually the 95% would get us an
innovation, but I don't think it does anymore. That whole category has been modified. I'll talk about it in a minute. Um, so basically the, you know, EPDS and HPDS have been sort of combined
into this building product section and procurement and building and material reuse. Um, it's all combined. So again there's pretty much as much the similar point totals but very much modified. Next I
think we have a little bit of a summary there. Yeah. um explaining a bit of the the zero waste planning uh which is the added requirement um
the embodied we talked about um so building material and reuse I think it combines the attributes and the reuse together um and it used to be 15 before I think it was 15 and 20 now it's 20 35 and 50 and
So we're again being conservative um in in saying we we may not be able to get 50 um building project product disclosures. So that's the combination of EPDS and
HPD and then low emitting. Next, >> Martine, let me just point out as well that there's there are some of these credits um that will be determined or easier to achieve or more points to achieve available um depending on the option that's chosen. So, for instance,
the B1.2 option where we're looking to um reuse the majority of the existing structure as much as possible that has a higher likelihood um on this particular building and reuse credit. Yeah. To achieve a higher point total. So there's some will be some variability inherent
um in the different uh alternatives that's eventually chosen. I would say there on you know there's there's obviously there's impact on some of the site there's impact but I think in general they're fairly other than
these one or two different ones they're fairly equivalent like I wouldn't say that I wouldn't say that the existing would get us 10 more points for example right it's probably just one of or two point difference I just want to clarify
that um in you know in light of your decision process. >> Yeah. No, I think that's a good point. So maybe we can just point out where those few happen so people are aware. >> Yeah. >> Exactly. Um
so there's a lot here, but we just wanted to give you a flavor, you know, of reduced embodied carbon limiting materials and EPDS and HPDS. Um, in terms of reducing body carbon, um,
we look to obviously to do high recycle content in steel and concrete and that still weighs in there. Um we look at lowcarbon insulation um brick in some cases again we try to be mindful of the three equals and
there'll be conversation around that and all of these also get impacted by the red list the set of red list materials that we're going to target. Um we look there are some material selection in terms of interior materials the flooring
the finishes the gypsons that can be selected to be low carbon. However we found out that the gypsum lowarbon is thinner and so has a bit less acoustical com um uh performance. So there's, you
know, there's a a little bit of a attention that needs to be paid um to some of these um opportunities and material selection options. Um removing ceiling like having exposed ceilings really help um because it's material
versus non no material in this case. Um the red list uh components. Um we uh we look at obviously we look at the red list per the credit of lead but
we also pay attention to the six classes of uh armful chemicals database the common materials framework. Um and what from our experience uh the majority of these uh materials that are
going to be contributing to the red list and the lead credits are interiors um within the air barrier. Next. So indoor environmental quality uh again same sort of you know if you look from
lead v4 to lead v5 most the credits have been modified there's some credits that have been combined and so that the ones that are the three new dots the first one occupant experience this sort of combines a set of criteria in addition
to the old lead v4 thermal comfort and daylight optimization allin one um it's a lot of points but when you look into it, it may not be as much as in the old lead version. Uh accessibility and
inclusion new point. Um there used to be a pilot that was similar to this. Um and so we've we've looked in we've looked into it in the past. Um but this this obviously is a bit more than what that
pilot was in the past. resilient spaces um also combines a bit of things including the operable windows in occupied space and then air quality testing and monitoring that's similar to the V4 a bit modified and enhanced qu
air quality is also similar to V4 a bit modified next so so one of the different things in one of the prerequisite is the fact that they also So they added mandated no vehicle
idling um as part it used to be the non-smoking prerequisite. Now they added the no vehicle idling in in that um and um then the construction IQ management plant which used to be a credit is now a
prerequisite. um low emitting materials. We it moved to materials and resources and then we talked about the bundling of thermal comfort and then um the air quality
testing and monitoring is one of the credits that's required by MSBA. So MSBA's green policy requires lead silver minimum, but they also have a set of minimum IQ and MMR credits that you need
to meet. And then there's an additional 1% reimbursement with an with an additional set of MR and EQ credits. um if you if you comply with those and you get them and they get
awarded through GBCI then uh it contributes to that additional 1% reimbursement. So that 1% reimbursement we keep track and we will keep you updated on how we can achieve it and its value you know alongside the but you
know the school construction costs and the total reimbursement by MSBA. Next. So, a bit of a flavor again of what all of those credits and criteria mean. Um,
you know, daylight and quality views. Abundant daylight is something that the designers and I know your team is keen on. Um, and so what we're going to that's going to be well integrated into the design. At the same time for the
lead we need to do a what we call a daylight modeling. There's a simulation that's done to see if we meet the thresholds of lead. Um environmental acoustics as well very important um and combination of daylight and interior
lighting which is now which used to be two credits and now it's into one credit in V5. Next. And then accessibility and inclusion. This addresses sort of the differentiated space or the you know
that support the different learning styles uh the multilingual multicultural all of this is part of of that credit which is something that's already part of your project. And then the last category. So they used
to be a an innovative in design and a regional priorities. they kind of took off the regional priorities which was a kind of a you know good a good category because I if you made certain thresholds
within you know for example if you made eight points in the energy efficiency you got an extra point in regional um that's gonzo they took that out so that that was four points and we usually targeted at least three of those four
points depending on the you you could choose there were certain attributed credits per zip code. You had a set of six and we usually, you know, were able to get three to four of those six points. Um,
that's gone. So now you you can still get 10 points, but it's pretty much they're called project priorities and it's pretty much a set of exemplary and innovative design and what they used to call pilot credits uh that are all
bundled together and they've removed some of the ones that we used to do that were you know pretty feasible. We've uh so joint use of facility is there it was a credit and it's now there but it's been modified a bit. Um, design for
circularity is something that we're looking into. Um, that used to be that was a pilot credit. So, there's a set of nine that we're going to target for your project because we want to optimize those as much as possible.
Next. Um so yeah the the exemplary performance for EPD and HPDS which were two credits in the um materials category. We used to get those on every project um two extra points and those are not longer
available in that category. So we have to go like I said we have to go for different ones for those nines. Um so in lead v4 we used to do the low mercury lamp the exemplary uh some of the pilot credits and then that 95%
construction waste management we didn't achieve it in every project always depends there's always conditions that may keep from achieving it there's you know as best as an hazardous material it sort of you know impacts the total
uh waste management uh percentage but we always targeted it. In some projects, we did get it, but that's not available anymore. It's sort of folded back into the credit. Um, and the regional, that's
those are the ones that are gone. Next, so just bringing back the, you know, the the tabulation of silver, gold, and platinum. Um, as Matt mentioned, MSBA requires the silver. So
that's a given. Um and the you know achieving at least 57 is something we think silver is achievable um with the buffer of seven points. Um to get to gold we would need another
16 points um and we think that's achievable but platinum is is a bit more challenging um at 80 points. So I think that's my last slide if I'm not mistaken and we
can open some discussion here. Yeah, I'll just leave this one up as well unless people want us to circle back to any of the other prior slides. There's a couple of hands up. Good. >> I think I saw Brenda's hand go up first.
>> So, just to clarify this slide here, is this showing what you would you think you could achieve or you would hope to achieve if we were going after the different categories with the the designs that you're considering now? >> Yes.
Okay. And for the ones that are um especially for the ones that are are striving for platinum here, what would the difference be between the gold and the the platinum for instance? >> So for instance, um you probably would
have to do 100% net zero and some of these will have to fully vet in terms of the you know the electrification for example. Can we have the natural gas, right? What what if we
have the pool and can we have the natural gas for the labs? Um, so we would have to do the electrification, we would have to do 100% renewable energy. Um I think the again the natural gas the
fossil fuel in really in um impacts um we'd have to check the the renewable energy. I would need to check and make sure um if um you get the full five points if it's installed or if you could
get the full five points with the PPA and then because we haven't done those evaluations yet and then um if you go PPA and you don't really fully get the the grid interactive you would get with the energy storage if you would own it
that may impact that grid interactive point as as well. So there's sort of a cascading effect of some of the decisions that would impact the platinum. I think there would have to be more um on the the indoor and outdoor
portable water, the water enhancement. Uh I know that rainwater harvesting systems for portable water um in in in the projects where we've installed them came back from the feedback we got from
the facilities manager is it's it's you know considerable maintenance and so it's an investment. It's a it's got a cost and then there's the maintenance. I think some of those would have to be considered though to get to platinum.
um as much as we're optimizing all the materials points um we would have to obtain them. So it's really obtaining all the may um
that right now and the challenge here is the review of GBCI because very few of us have gone through a full V5 review right now. And so that's why, you know, there could be a strive for platinum,
but um there's a lot there that that may play into getting platinum because platinum is another 20 plus points. What we can do from here if there's still some appetite for platinum we can
um definitely track the exact criteria and then uh as we as we do in schematic design as we do there there could be I'm not sure in schematic design Matt right because I
think we would have to do this now um in terms of costs if there's any items that are involve cost and sort of you know specific design impact. one of your one of your challenge is the fact that you're not getting as much points from
because there's not enough bus routes um you know bus hours route um and there's not like a tea station right there you know um that impacts some of the
sustainable location transportation points and that makes it even harder to get you know It's you got to make do with some somewhere else to get those extra 20 points. >> And and Martine, I think it's just worth
noting the same way that you explained that we would want to be targeting over the 50 points uh for silver and over the 60 points for gold. While you're listing 80 points there for platinum, we would need to be targeting um a higher than 80 point total to have some confidence that
we could achieve the platinum after the fact. Right. >> Right. And per our assessment, it was really that's why we put 80 there because per our assessment, it was really hard to get beyond 80 with you know with where we are with the site and and everything else that would need to
be done. >> Yeah. And so and to answer your earlier question uh that was posed to me, I think yes, we would need to try to identify or want to identify what that cost premium might be. I know that it's a tough thing to try to put a number on,
but um thinking about overall where we are in the project um it would be something that I think we want consideration on sooner rather than later, but um so let me just take the hands in the order that I saw them popped up. So I think Luke is next and
then I don't between Sunny and Ken. I'm not sure who got first, but Ken. Okay. All right. We'll go in that order. Okay. Um, uh, not if you can hear me. I had to change locations and Okay, great.
Um, so let's see. We have, uh, eight categories under lead v5. Um, those are kind of like the row headers and we have six different, um, designs, uh, for the high school. Now between those eight
categories um the rows uh I imagine that some are sensitive to which concept is selected and others probably aren't. Could you for our committee um identify
the uh the lead V5 categories that are most sensitive and if you can uh most sensitive to you know the the concept and then uh if it's possible give us an idea of which direction uh whether they go in a negative direction or a positive
direction um based on uh the concepts uh I'm not asking um every category here um to be kind of walked through in that manner. But if there are some uh highly sensitive uh to you know the concept can
we know about those? >> Yeah, we we talked about it a bit. Maybe you you in your transition you missed those those points. So in general at this stage where we're at and in general for our projects the renoad and the new
construction are very equivalent in achieving whether it's lead gold or lead silver um or lead platinum. where we see a couple of point differences um is the uh we talked about this the
materials and resources category as a point with building reuse and of course your renoad will have more building reuse but we haven't done the calculation yet so I want to make sure everybody understands we haven't done the calculation so we you know I don't
want to advance it's one two or three points more because it's probably a small amount that could be uh probably captured back in the new construction if you know with looking at
um meeting the carbon reduction you know we're going to be looking at potentially Matt right uh um embodied carbon reduction uh mass timber um in some areas and that could
contribute to outweigh that point from the Renaad. So that's sort of you know one area. The other area is between the between the the the options uh would be
this sort of the the site the impact of the parking on um the um urban heat island. Although if you do a synthetic field on top of your parking garage,
it's not accounting for reduction of herbanite island. So, you know, again, it's nuances, you know, unless you put a big PV canopy on it and you shade it, which you would do on the surface parking. So I just want to say that I I you know it's it's
going to be it's not going going to be a major impact between those um between those options. Um I think all of those options are will feasibly attain
gold and or platinum in the same manner in with the same challenges. Uh so um I guess could I interpret your answer as um none of those categories apart from maybe
materials and resources are very sensitive to the concept selected. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That means you understand what I said in in a long long detailed way. So I'm glad.
>> All right. Ken, you want to go ahead? I think you might have answered this in Luke's question, but does a new pool versus renovating the existing because it's not part of the MSBA project have any impact on this?
Yes, because and we've dealt with this on another project where the new pool was completely separate and not included in the lead certification and it was it was being built like
you know six months apart or a year apart. So we were able to do the whole certification without the pool. um and that you know that had um you know we didn't have to deal with the
pool so the impact of the pool was not you know imposed on the school. >> Do you think that was because of the schedule or just the fact that it was a new separate project? >> This this I believe this was a new pool without having an existing pool on that side. So it was that said we're going to
build the school and the pool and there was no existing pool. So it's a bit different than your situation where you're deciding between the existing and the new. >> So it could or couldn't. It's not not clear. >> Right. >> Okay. Okay. Thanks.
>> All right, Sunny. And then Sarah, we can take you after. >> Thanks for doing this, Martin. I know how much work this is. Um I my my question maybe isn't just for you but for this group as a whole but
maybe first for you. Um what based on everything that you've heard from this group um what goals do you think um we've made specifically will help drive up our ability to meet
higher certification levels in V5? and what sort of strategies would we need to implement to create that sort of level up? Um, and then I have one more question. So maybe just if you can answer that one first.
>> Uh, I think you're I mean you know the specialized stretch code that's you know sort of contributing you know indirectly to some of the energy goals. the fact that you've you are
looking to do geothermal and or what you know geothermal and all and or all electric um also impacts like there's no um you know there there doesn't seem to be and I don't think there needs to be a
specific percentage because we have an EUI target um in terms of energy um in terms of water we're you know looking at u there hasn't been any specific you know portable water goals but we're
looking at our typical schools with very low fixtures and etc like you know appliances >> the embodied carbon is one that would be um good I know we've we we had brushed
on it on on some the previous advisory and looking for maybe a target from you we've you We've heard from other communities 20 to 25 that's usually even some of our corporate clients that you that's
usually a target. So, so that that would help um uh that will help having a goal there. Um and then you know we know you're interested in sort of the net zero whether it's a PPA or or you know an own
solar system. Um and that's really helping as well I think. Um it's you know we're we're all integrating this as part of the assessments. Um in terms of materials Sunni you had mentioned you know an
appetite for you know circularity. Um we have the red list in terms of lead but I don't know if this group is interested in in going beyond red list beyond the lead for red list you know. Um,
>> I think that's Yeah, I mean that's a pretty good list. I feel like maybe to that point, it doesn't feel like we have any sort of driving um >> through an art. >> Yeah. And and and so I like um just sort of pulling in the experience that I've
had on other projects like a project that cannot get the site credits is going to struggle unless they really figure out how to like find a drive. So if there's water efficiency, like we have to do better than just lowflow fixtures. We got to go like composting
toilets. So I'm just trying to figure out like from this group what what is the drive uh to get us to these higher levels of certification because currently it doesn't seem like we have it. Uh for one and and if it's really just that like
lead platinum sounds really awesome then maybe this is the second question. Why don't we just sign up now, risk it, and does the timeline work? Can we still meet V4? Like, if that's really the drive, I feel like I'd prefer we we go V5 and have like true measurable.
>> We've already decided on V5. That's been decided upfront. We've already decided we're going V5. The question is The question is, is it gold or platinum? because the I think the the the SBC uh
and the whole team your your advisory group um they had an issue with understanding the difference between lead v4 platinum and what does that mean for lead v5 and that's what we tried to >> No I think you did not I think you did a
really good job with that I just I just feel like I'm worried that we're gonna say we want V5 platinum and we have no roadmap to get there it so I think that's why I was suggesting showing what it entails you
know to get there versus where you know what we think but we think gold is you know a feasible goal I mean there's still a lot to as you know Sunni there's still a
lot to experience with GBCI on V5 >> that's my main concern in terms of how are they going to push back on reviewing some of these things and the nuances and the interpretation and we were we're all
you know Sarah you and I are all familiar and how they address before you know um review of all the criteria but this is new charter territory. >> Yeah and I mean Tara you you and I you
should go ahead. >> Yeah. So, so that's sort of the the the dilemma here is, you know, gold or platinum, right? And and >> are you looking for this group to make a recommendation today just so that you
can bring that back to the SBC? Do you like I guess I haven't necessarily seen that interaction to understand like I I I have heard that we're going B5 and I think that's great. I think that's the way to go. we will get a better school
if we go V5. Um, I just would love to stress like this will be sustainable and great no matter which certification level we're going after. And if we don't have any strong like water goals or I mean I I
love energy and atmosphere but like we talk about it so much we need so many other things beyond that. I think yeah I think Sunni that there's a lot happening with the site that you know is going to sort of be embedded in sort of the lead
criteria but there's a a there's a a a very I think uh interesting discussion around site and connectivity to the fells and the outdoor classrooms. I think that and then obviously the you
know the management of the site water and storm water all of this is going to bring in >> you know resiliency you know bio swells what the strategies that are going to be used are going to obviously be very
sustain I have one more question and then I'll I'll mute but I guess I'm just wondering like do we even have enough information to make this decision right Now, >> um, it's a good point, Matt. Uh, I mean, it would, you know, what we've seen in
other communities when there's that sort of dilemma is, you know, there's a target and an aspiration. And, you know, there's there seems to be appetite for platinum here. We know it's very very
it may be very challenging to get there. we're going to show what it means to get there in a bit more detail because we just talked about this earlier. Um, and so that could be, you know, something you consider, you know, we want to go beyond silver. I think
that's pretty clear that, you know, everybody wants to go beyond silver. You know, is it gold aspiration, platinum, that sort of thing, something to consider. >> Yeah. So, I'll pivot over to Sarah, but I just want to offer maybe a different
way of thinking about it and sort of where I maybe started and and potentially wasn't clear enough in terms of how I was explaining it, but there was the guidance from the school committee that the project under version 4 um should be a platinum level project.
And so if we just think about what that means in version five, and I think Martin, what you've laid out is that there's sort of an equivalency to gold, but I didn't I didn't hear you say that explicitly. So I I want to make sure that's a true statement. If but if it
is, um I think we could at least suggest a recommendation that we're trying to um acknowledge the fact that the version 4 platinum um rating would be an equivalent to lead version five. And yes, there's there's a lot that we have to do to figure out exactly what that means and what the strategies we're
going to use to get there are. Um, but I I think we could at least state sort of that equivalency and make that recommendation back to the the full building committee as a starting point. But I can Sarah, why don't you go and you can you can touch on that or you can go back to your original question. I'm sure you had a different thought there as well.
>> Well, a couple. Yeah. >> Just before you start, Sarah, I just want to clarify that um, you know, that's just yeah I think from what we know now yes I think we we can say although it's
it's hard because it's such apples to oranges it's hard to really assess it but I you know I agree what she said man I think you know the closest equivalent is probably gold like I don't think silver is equivalent to platinum you
know platinum V4 I don't think silver V5 is platinum V4 I gets closer to gold. Just want to say that. Go on, Sarah. >> Sorry, I I had a couple of thoughts. One, um I agree with Sunny. You know, I you know, Platinum's lovely, but you
know, it's not it's not about the certification. It's about the project. And and and we have to think about who the the building is for and who's going to be using the building and in that building, you know, for four years of education. And um I'd like some focus to
be on the students and um you know it no matter what the building's going to be sustainable. Um it can't help but be. So that's great you know and you know as someone who works in the space you know of course we love to aspire to higher levels of certification but I don't know
that that should be like the end goal. um and that it it's you know it's it's about the the students and um I'd like you know that to be part of the focus and honestly you know again as someone who works in the
space leadv platinum is extremely difficult um even if we're doing like all the right things and and net zero and you know all electric and all that stuff it it doesn't mean that we're there's a lot to do um and so I also am concerned about costs. The cost of
building schools is like going up, you know, exponentially day by day. So, you know, recognizing that there's a budget and um there's limitations around that as well. And again, thinking back to what's going to be best for the students
um and sustainable simultaneously. Um I think that that's a critical piece of of our thinking. And then also I guess you know along those lines is that the MSBA hasn't addressed lead v5 yet and we don't know specifically what
their reimbursements are going to be. We can make some pretty good assumptions. Um you know as in the past they have focused on the interior you know the interior environment the learning environment and materials uh pretty heavily. But you know who knows what they're going to come back with and
maybe we'll get a nice big reimbursement just for being lead silver. You know we don't know. So, we're also struggling with that piece of things. Um, hopefully they'll make some decisions around that soon. >> Yeah. Yeah. Sarah, there is a d there
was a draft or there is a draft. Um, >> there is >> I I I Yeah, I think there was something at some point that I saw. I don't have it, but I thought I saw something. >> It's just in the email, Martin. >> Okay, that's what it is. You got it,
too, Sunny. probably couldn't find that email again, but I it it's it's lead V5 silver, but I my understanding is that they're going to keep with the and correct me if I'm wrong, Sunni, but they're going to keep
with the 3% reimbursement for the specialized code and that 1%. So, there's no additional reimbursement for lead silver. That's the base. That's for your main re >> similar to what they have now. similar what to what they have now. Exactly.
Exactly. It's pretty similar. So lead lead silver is not additional. It used to be in the past but it that changed uh like it you know in the 201517 uh green school policy but but basically
the the only the main reimbursement is tied to this lead silver and then additional reimbursement is the specialized code and the stretch energy code. And then the 1% which is for healthy material points which goes into
the MR and the EQ points. It's a little bit different than the previous one because we have a different set of points. So that is what I'm not sure that that's all finalized Sarah. >> So I want to just give a quick time check. Um I know Paul you have your hand
up. We have about four minutes remaining. Um so we can certainly use up until 5:30. will um just remind people if they want to put questions they're not able to ask into the chat um we can find a way to respond to those after the fact um if needs be um but I'll stop
there um and let Paul take a little bit of time and then I saw Brenda you had your hand up as well >> you um I really like liked what Brenda had to say in the chat I think that that platinum should be aspirational and gold
um at a minimum u I don't really care about a plaque on a building. Um, I care about the next 50 years. Um, what we're saddling future generations with. Um, as well as, um, you know, I feel like we
don't actually ever include the costs of the actual emissions that we're going to create with this building. I mean, if it's even if it's completely electrified, there are still emissions. Um, and you know, that doesn't get calculated in the true cost. Um, so I
think, you know, if we can get gold, I I don't care. But I mean, I think that having an all-electric building to me is um shouldn't even be a conversation point um at this point. Um I mean I I think it's kind of insane the state would even contribute a nickel to any
infrastructure in this state uh for building anything that depends on fossil fuels. Um, so I don't want to use the last of our two minutes and I want to hear from Brenda. >> Oh, I I put my comment into the chat actually trying to save time, but I was
just basically pointing out that there's upfront cost and operational cost considerations. And so netzero will have significant operational cost considerations long term. >> Yeah. And yeah, as a as a quick preview just and Martine, maybe you were going to say the same thing, but on the
>> the May 20th meeting when we're going to be sharing the cost estimates um which are sort of our first cost um Martine is also on track to be sharing uh some life cycle cost analysis um information as well um so that that we can start to
yeah understand those long-term cost implications as well as operational costs. >> And and and there's a comment by Luke that's talking about 20 years. So Luke, we actually do a 50-year LCCA. That's the minimum required by MSBA. So all of
these um will be looked at on a 50-year u time period. So it's it's going to be the initial costs, the maintenance cost, the replacements cost, and the energy cost savings. Um and we also do an equivalent
carbon analysis alongside that. And at the since we had our incentive meetings, we're I'm hoping to have that by May 20, but we may have like a sort of a ballpark uh incentive line item. So you can you
can see that as well. >> Martin and Matt, um just for the cost estimate, is there any uh way to create some sort of like hierarchy or or structure of um net zero provisions for this building? So, like if we do um 100%
solar, like how much extra would that be if we do 80%. Like I don't I don't know which percentages we we want to look at or what you might want to look at, but like I would advocate for something like that so that the the school building committee could see that sort of break it down and understand how that might
also then impact the operational budget. >> Yeah. So, I mean, we did do that um at the last round. I don't think it was as clear as it can be. So we'll work on trying to make sure that it's the information is transparent and I think that the way that we approached it and maybe I'll get my percentages off. We
had a baseline which was essentially covering the entirety of the roof um with photovoltaic panels and and that understanding what percentage that gives you sort of a resultant percentage um and then certainly the 100%age um as well and what that means in terms of ground canopy um structures and that
type of thing. I think we had a 50% in there as well, Martin, but I can't remember if it was 50 or 75 or if we just went roof and and full. >> I think Yeah, I think we went roof. I think we we had originally 50 and then we just decide to do the roof because
the sort of challenges of the parking options, >> right? But we can I think we can do that for 50%. It's it's it becomes simpler math at that point once you have the extremes known, right? Y Yeah, the roof is going to give us a
percentage Sunni. You know, once we get that, we'll know and then we can do another tier if needed. >> Okay, >> thank you. >> We are at 5:31. Um, and I definitely appreciate everybody's time and want to respect
everybody's time. Um and really want to thank everyone again for uh participating in the discussion and we certainly will uh get together um probably not again until um the fall at this point unless something comes up and there's an urgent need to meet and then
we can certainly coordinate something along those lines. So thank you everybody. >> Thank you. Very helpful. Thank you everyone for chiming in. Thank you. Thanks. Bye.