Mastering a Plan for the University

The university functions as a self-contained community, and like the planners of towns and cities, administrators must look as far down the road as they can to anticipate future needs. In the past, universities focused on architectural master plans to guide campus development, but since the early 1990s, campus planners have realized that a key to the success of an overall plan is utility master planning.

With increased electrical and HVAC loads, a greater need for outside air, and increasing communications network requirements, administrators are striving to overcome their natural shyness for pre-investment in utility systems and consider the potential savings produced by long-term planning for utility infrastructure.

Savvy engineering firms, like Carter & Burgess, have been taking advantage of this trend for several years now. "Our interest in utility master planning goes back to 1995, when our group was founded," says Scott Clark, P.E., CEM, vice president of the national firm's Energy and Power Solutions Group. "Recently, however, it has grown in prominence. Some of the driving factors in recent interest are college campuses experiencing rapid growth, technological advancements and aging equipment."

In fact, about 78% of all college and university buildings were constructed before 1980, with a median construction year of 1967, according to Carter & Burgess. What this means is that equipment installed in the '50s, '60s and '70s is reaching the end of its useful life and will need to be replaced with newer, more efficient technology.

As for the subject of rapid growth, that description may be an understatement. The U.S. Dept. of Education predicts that college enrollment will reach 17 million by 2011—a 16% increase from 2001. This will likely mean that a growing percentage of university budgets will be spent on infrastructure-related improvements.

Also confronted with volatile energy prices, university administrators are hoping long-term planning can provide the flexibility and adaptability that will make them better prepared for this anticipated growth, which is already beginning to manifest itself (see "Graduate Degree Dorms, p. 40). According to Glenn Jardine, P.E., vice president with Heery International, Atlanta, two decades ago energy prices were a huge concern, leading to an interest in energy conservation.

Jardine, who has been working on utility master planning for universities for more than 20 years, notes that today the concern has been renewed, but with a growing interest in life-cycle costs. This is where utility master planning helps. However, the process has been further affected by the whole green building movement. "The LEED impact is big. A lot of university clients are putting LEED certification in their prerequisites," Jardine says. In fact, he adds, the LEED program has given university CFOs grounds for bringing up the energy conservation issue.

The U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program has become the benchmark by which facilities judge their level of energy efficiency and sustainability—even when they aren't necessarily going for LEED certification.

As is the case for all projects aiming for such certification, it comes down to weighing first cost against long-term costs. "Most universities wouldn't go for a platinum LEED certification, but shooting for silver or gold would probably deliver the return that one wants," says Carter & Burgess' Clark.

A focus on LEED certification unearths another trend in current utility master planning programs: the growing interest in commissioning. "Administrators are not only attracted to commissioning programs to get the system right, but LEED certification and the new energy code will also require it," says David Pope, P.E., CEM, senior mechanical engineer with Heery. However, according to Pope's colleague Joe Gottardy, P.E., CEM, it should be noted that in all LEED projects, commissioning is one of the more costly points for certification.

Engineering firms like Heery and Carter & Burgess have the ability to provide commissioning. Heery will usually do so on projects where the firm functions as program manager. However, on projects where it provides master planning studies, Heery is likely to turn to an outside consultant.

The whole notion of master planning has a long history in the university environment. Academic master planning has been around since time immemorial, but an effective educational master plan depends on a long-range and comprehensive physical plan—something that is new to many administrators.

And university officials are realizing that the utility master plan is not something that happens after the architectural master plan has been decided. It used to be the complaint that much effort went into funding, siting and designing new buildings—but not how to heat, cool and power these buildings. But these days, utility systems are being considered as an integral part of the overall campus plan.

"Typically, there are two camps in a university," Clark says. "The utility planning group looks at the physical space use. Then, there is the director of the physical plant who looks at utilities. Traditionally, the planning folks do the architectural master plan, and then the director of the physical plant would get involved. Nowadays, the latter does a utility master plan that mates up with the architectural master plan. Both sides challenge each other."

Others, however, still point out that utility master planning depends on the architectural master plan. "The utility master plan is usually an add-on," Jardine says.

But utility master plans can encompass a wide variety of time frames. Heery, for example, developed a utility master plan for the University of Georgia in the '90s that was a five-year plan. "The utility master plan that we did for Georgia was able to hold its own," says Jardine. "But a 10- to 15-year plan would be more typical."

And some university facility planners are looking even 30 years into the future (see "Energy Self-Sufficiency," p.34). Clark discounts the notion that university administrators are paralyzed by fear of pre-investment, an obstacle to long-term planning. "Most of these administrators are VPs of finance," he suggests. "They understand dollars. They understand that it's pretty easy to make plants expandable. It used to seem like universities were recession-proof. But tax revenues are way down, and this is affecting them."

But the fact remains that in the post-dot-com bubble era—when many universities heavily invested in the Nasdaq—the last few years of recession have taken a toll on school budgets. Public institutions have fewer tax dollars and private schools are struggling with fewer donations for capital projects.

"I see more and more campuses planning in smaller bites," says Heery's Pope. "This is frequently driven by a need for a single new building and leads to a satellite arrangement for utility infrastructure. Most of these campuses have master plans in place, but growth is outstripping their expectations, and they have to resort to a satellite configuration."

One can't point to a single factor driving the interest in utility master planning. It's all interrelated. Administrators are aware that they need to plan for long-term energy conservation, and that it can be accomplished with state-of-the-art technology available today. "Administrators and designers know that facilities need to make their energy delivery systems flexible with respect to load shape and fuel choice," Clark says.

There seems to be a general agreement among consulting engineers that university administrators are at least interested in newer, energy-efficient technologies: "Cogen and thermal energy storage are being pushed, and there's a quick payback on thermal energy storage systems," says Clark. "The economics for cogen can be more difficult, especially in regions like the Midwest. California or the Northeast make much more sense for cogen. We've installed a TES and cogen operation at Princeton that has been successful. The TES runs fully loaded at night."

Building automation systems are definitely included in the utility master plan these days, as is central power metering. "Effective energy supply and distribution means having the right information. One doesn't want to meter just for the sake of metering. Engineers and owners need to be deliberate, and to know what we are going to use the information for," Clark says.

All of the issues that can affect mechanical and electrical design in general come into play in formulating the utility master plan for a university—environmental impact issues, for example, as permitting can be a major issue.

Mold is another hot button. "A university's hazardous materials guy I know, who used to deal mostly with asbestos, now spends all his time on mold," says Gottardy. "From the design side, if we address the mold issue in commissioning, then we have covered this base."

Another consideration is that there are simply more players at the table. There has been a trend toward outsourcing of maintenance services by universities, and these outside contractors must be brought into planning sessions.

"Utility master planning has evolved into a more formal process," says Juan Ontiveros, director of utilities and energy management at the University of Texas at Austin. "In the past, it wasn't so much a focus, but nowadays, larger dollar impacts mean a greater need for master planning."

No matter what form utility master planning takes, volatile energy prices, more players and increasingly complex technology mean that the importance of the utility master planning process can only grow.