DGNB Denmark tilpasning til hospitaler. Charlotte Falstrup

Transkript

1 Charlotte Falstrup

2 Charlotte Falstrup Cand.arch. (København og Berlin)

3 Charlotte Falstrup Cand.arch. (København og Berlin) Konsulent, DGNB International

4 Charlotte Falstrup Cand.arch. (København og Berlin) Konsulent, DGNB International White arkitekter A/S

5 Forarbejde til teknikgrupper:

6 Forarbejde til teknikgrupper: Udgangspunktet: Tysk version til pilotfase (tysk markedsversion bliver sandsynligvis tilgængelig undervejs i vores tilpasningsproces, og bliver integreret i teknikgruppernes arbejde)

7 Forarbejde til teknikgrupper: Identificering af ændringer fra kontorversion (den der ligger til grund for tilpasningen til hospitaler i Tyskland)

8 Forarbejde til teknikgrupper: Identificering af ændringer fra kontorversion (den der ligger til grund for tilpasningen til hospitaler i Tyskland) Sammenligning med dansk kontorversion

9 Forarbejde til teknikgrupper: Identificering af ændringer fra kontorversion (den der ligger til grund for tilpasningen til hospitaler i Tyskland) Sammenligning med dansk kontorversion Arbejdsdokumenter til teknikgrupper

10 Identificering af ændringer fra kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer heraf 1 som ikke er relateret til hospitaler

11 Identificering af ændringer fra kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer heraf 1 som ikke er relateret til hospitaler 23 har ingen ændringer heraf relaterer 16 til en nyere version end den danske

12 Identificering af ændringer fra kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer heraf 1 som ikke er relateret til hospitaler 23 har ingen ændringer heraf relaterer 16 til en nyere version end den danske 4 kriterier udgår (eller integreres i andre kriterier)

13 Sammenligning med dansk kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer 23 har ingen ændringer 4 kriterier udgår

14 Sammenligning med dansk kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer og skal behandles i teknikgrupper / ekspertgruppe 23 har ingen ændringer 4 kriterier udgår

15 Sammenligning med dansk kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer og skal behandles i teknikgrupper / ekspertgruppe 23 har ingen ændringer og skal ikke behandles videre (med forbehold for ændringer) 4 kriterier udgår

16 Sammenligning med dansk kontorversion 48 kriterier: 21 har ændringer og skal behandles i teknikgrupper / ekspertgruppe 23 har ingen ændringer og skal ikke behandles videre (med forbehold for ændringer) 4 kriterier udgår og skal ikke behandles videre

17 21 ændringer fra kontorversion - gennemgang -

18 21 ændringer fra kontorversion Environmental Quality 1 ud af 11 kriterier Economical Quality 2 af 2 kriterier Social Quality 11 af 15 kriterier + 1 udgår

19 21 ændringer fra kontorversion Technical Quality 4 af 5 kriterier Process Quality 3 af 9 kriterier + 1 udgår Site Quality 0 af 6 kriterier + 2 udgår

20 Environmental Quality Life Cycle Assessment Local Environmental Impact Environmentally Friendly Material Production Primary Energy Demand Drinking Water Demand and Wastewater Volume Land Use

21 Environmental Quality Drinking water demand and volume of waste water Same, but with introduction of differentiation of users (patients, staff and visitors). Calculations are made individually for all three groups. Also the factors for water consumption is specified individually for the three user groups. Different intervals of floor washing. Evaluationpoints are given in the same manner as in the german officeversion.

22 Economical Quality Building-Related Lifecycle Costs Value Retention, Suitability for Third Party Use

23 Economical Quality Building related life-cycle costs 2.1.3: Introduction of Nutzflächenarten for cleaning and maintenance New reference building. Introduction of differentiation of the price of net areas following how costintensive they are (discount or supplement to an average, so that you will not be punished for having e.g. more operation rooms than "usual"). Appendices 1-5 seem to be identical to office version, except for a few exclusions. Appendices 6 and 7 are specific for hospitals.

24 Economical Quality Suitability for third-party use Space efficiency: The values are changed. Max points are given for a factor* of 0,556 or higher (was 0,75). 30 max points. Suitability covers the remaining 70 points, but is otherwise awarded in the same manner as in the office version. Subcriterion 3, Possibility of modification for other types of use, is left out because of the building type. * space efficiency quotient as a quotient of usable area (UA) and gross floor area (GFA)

25 Social Quality Thermal Comfort Indoor Air Quality Acoustic Comfort Visual Comfort User Influence on Building Operation Quality of Outdoor Spaces Safety and Security Handicapped Accessibility Efficient Use of Floor Area Suitability for Conversion Public Access Cycling Convenience Design and Urban Planning Quality through Competition Integration of Public Art

26 Social Quality Thermal comfort in winter Regulations for diagnosis and therapy can overthrow the demands in this criterion. Instead of only assessing office space, the space is divided into: 1 examination and treatment 2 care 3 administration The three are weighted according to their share of the areas summed. The conversion of checklist points to evaluation points differs from NBV 2009, but is similar to that of the danish office version.

27 Social Quality Thermal comfort in summer Identical to 18, exept from the conversion of checklist points to evaluation points, which differs from both NBV 2009 and from the danish office version: 100 = 10 (target) 85 = 9 (sub target) 45 = 5 (reference) 25 = 1 (limit)

28 Social Quality Indoor air quality The rooms that must be measured, are split in two categories: Bedrooms (sengestuer) and rooms for employees, which is again split into rooms for "officework" (som arbejdsstationer) and rooms for treatment. In larger projects, an additional type of room must be measured, chosen from what would be most relevant. (So, compared to the office version, more rooms must be measured, to include spaces for both patients and employees).

29 Social Quality Acoustic comfort This criterion is adapted to hospitals from the new core system. The system divides rooms into 9 categories after their use, from which the irrelevant ones are omitted in the differing profiles. For hospitals, the categories 1 Single offices, 2 Multi-person offices, 3 Dining rooms, and 8 Circulation areas, are kept. Rooms for treatment belong to category 1, and rooms for operation belong to category 2. Note: This does not count as a change yet. The limits and awarding of points must be compared to the danish version, since the NKH relates to a newer office version.

30 Social Quality Visual comfort All stationary workplaces must be accounted for - also those that are specific for hospitals, like operation, patient's rooms, sterilisation. Two of the indicators of the checklist have additions: 1 "Availability of daylight throughout the building" is supplemented by daylight-imitating technologies. 2 "Availability of daylight in regularly used work areas" also includes open spaces (opholdsområder). Ad 1: Technology that imitates daylight is considered a lesser mean, and is therefore not awarded with as many points as daylight. Only if you have less than 1 % daylight factor, you can collect points by using these technologies. The target values need only be met in 30 % of the net area (50 % in the office version). Ad 2: A weighting of the areas is allowed.

31 Social Quality User control possibilities User control possibilities for both employees and patients. To receive points, the patient (in the case of temperatures, the attending staff) must be able to control the environment in his/her room. This must be met, regardless of whether the remaining rooms are controlled per room or per zone (more than 3 persons). Content of indicator 7 is changed. In this version it only concerns how many of the topics of the indicators can be controlled by the patient from the bed (and only relates to units with patients that are able to use controls).

32 Social Quality Quality of outdoor spaces The criterion has more emphasis on the surrounding areas, compared to the office version, because being able to go outside is important for the wellbeing of many of the patients. Changes in the quantitative checklist: Max points are raised from 50 to 60 points. Less points for balconies and the like, and adding of a new topic: Percentage of the surroundings NOT occupied by traffic and parking. The qualitative checklist is changed completely, with a long list of new questions. Total max points are 40. New text on interrelationship with other criteria.

33 Social Quality Safety and security Indicator 1.3 and 1.4 only applies to parking opportunities for the employees. The 8 point given in indicator 1.6 are split, so 5 points are given for having a person surveilling the video, and 3 points are given for having only one entrance during nighttime.

34 Social Quality Accessibility Three checklists (user groups): Areas for staff (offices, meeting/break rooms, reception. Extra 20 points for accesible workstations) Areas for patients (patient's rooms, examination rooms - in general everywhere where patients are. Extra points - 50 in total - for better bathrooms, handrails in hallways, parking space for wheelchairs) Areas for visitors (extra points - 20 in total - for accessible main entrance, outdoor areas, handrails in hallways) Extra points sum up to 90 points. 10 are given for complying with the minimum requirements.

35 Social Quality Space efficiency The values are changed (Max.points are given for a factor of 0,556 or higher).

36 Social Quality Suitability for conversion Same procedure, exept for the content of the checklist, which is altered. The topics are: 1. Building modularity (same) New demand of heights for different functions, measured for "råhus". Max points Dividing of systems (new) Awarding of points for having construction, facades and installations that can be separated after use. Max points Spacial structure (same) Max.points Load-bearing system (new) Awarding of points for payload in kn/m². Max points Technical building equipment (new) The title seems misguiding, as the topic is on feed systems for supply and disposal. Max points 30.).

37 Social Quality Public access - udgår

38 Social Quality Bicycling convenience Qualitative aspects are the same as for office. Quantitative aspects differs in the sense that much less parking for bicycles is needed, compared to office version - e.g. max points for 1 parking space/300m2 instead of 1 parking space/80 m2. In university hospitals there must be 50 % more.

39 Technical Quality Fire Prevention Sound Insulation Building Envelope Quality Ease of Cleaning and Maintenance Ease of Dismantling and Recycling

40 Technical Quality Sound insulation Differences in awarding of points, with less emphasis on airborne sound (only 25 max points as compared to 40 points in office version. The spare 15 point are evenly distributed with 5 points on each of the indicators 2-4). Boundaries for db is not specified, instead a reference is made to a DIN norm (4109).

41 Technical Quality Building envelope quality Identical, exept from an addition of a second category of heattransmission coefficient for rooms with low temperatures (12-19 degrees). But nothing indicates that this change has something to do with hospitals.

42 Technical Quality Ease of building cleaning and maintenance 1. Load bearing structure Only change is awarding of points (from 10/20 to 8/16). 2. Non-structural external components More positive view on access to facades by externally mounted mechanical system ("Fassadenbefahranlage" - jeg gætter på at der menes "traverserende pudsegondol" eller noget lignende), since it is undesireable in a hospital to have to access from inside when cleaning. 3. Non-load-bearing interior structures 3.1 The flooring category is completely changed to match the demands of a hospital. Only 15 points max. (20) 3.2 Same, but only 15 points max. (20) 3.3 Floor plan free of obstacles: Topics are changed to match hospitals. Points are moved here: Max points 34. (20)

43 Technical Quality Ease of dismantling and recycling Building parts that are contaminated from radiation are excepted from the evaluation. Apart from this - no changes in the criterion.

44 Process Quality Comprehensive Project Definition Integrated Planning Comprehensive Building Design Sustainability Aspects in Tender Phase Documentation for Facility Management Environmental Impact of Construction Site /Construction Process Construction Quality Assurance /Quality Control Measures Systematic Commissioning

45 Process Quality Integrated planning 1. indicator: The integrated designteam is widened with a planner of medicotechnics and a FM-planner. Subdivisions are introduced in the checklist. 2. indicator: Max points are changed from 20 to indicator: Max points are changed from 20 to indicator: "Participation of users" is changed into "Owner/representative of users as partners in the planning". Further subdivisions are introduced. 5. indicator: Max points are changed from 20 to 15. "Public participation" is changed into "Participation of employees, patients, public". The description in the checklist is changed, but the meaning is similar.

46 Process Quality Optimization and complexity of planning method The limit value is set to 10 instead of 40 points. The reference value is set to 50 points instead of 60.

47 Process Quality Sustainability aspects in tender phase 1. indicator "Integration of sustainability aspects in the call for tenders" has max points 70 instead of indicator "Integration of sustainability aspects when choosing companies" has max points 30 instead of 50.

48 Process Quality Quality of companies involved / prequalification - udgår

49 Site Quality Site Location Risks Site Location Conditions Public Image and Social Conditions Access to Transportation Access to Specific-Use Facilities Connections to Utilities

50 Site Quality Local site conditions - udgår Integrated in criterion 56, under the new title "Microclimate"

51 Site Quality Connections to utilities - udgår

52 mere om Lifecycle Costs (LCC)

53 mere om Lifecycle Costs (LCC) New reference building Værdierne for referencebygningen for hospitaler er resultatet af et studie, som den tyske arbejdsgruppe har foretaget. Nybyggerier fra medlemmer af arbejdsgruppen blev analyseret, samt parametre fra forskningsprojektet OPIK (Optimierung und Analyse von Prozessen in Krankenhäusern) ved Karlsruher Institut für Technologie og fra BKI (Baukostenindex).

54 mere om Lifecycle Costs (LCC) Introduction of Nutzflächenarten Nutzflächenarten: Typer af arealanvendelse (cirka) Skal bruges i sammenhæng med Kostenflächenarten: Typer af arealpriser Arealerne får en pointværdi efter afvigelse i anlægsomkostning/m2 i procent i forhold til gennemsnitsprisen. Introduction of differentiation of the price of net areas following how costintensive they are (discount or supplement to an average, so that you will not be punished for having e.g. more operation rooms than "usual").

55 mere om LCC New appendix 7

56 mere om LCC New appendix 6

57 mere om Lifecycle Costs (LCC) Introduction of Nutzflächenarten

58 mere om Lifecycle Costs (LCC) Baggrundsmateriale, Nutzflächenarten ph.d.-afhandling, Jochen Abel: Ein produktorientiertes Verrechnungssystem für Leistungen des Facility Management im Krankenhaus (Et produktorienteret system til afregning af FM-ydelser i hospitaler)

59 En kort status

60 En kort status Profilen for hospitaler lægger sig tæt op af DGNBs kerne

61 En kort status Profilen for hospitaler lægger sig tæt op af DGNBs kerne Der er ikke fundet problemer, som ikke kan løses

62 En kort status Profilen for hospitaler lægger sig tæt op af DGNBs kerne Der er ikke fundet problemer, som ikke kan løses Teknikgrupperne vil kunne anbefale langt de fleste ændringer

63 En kort status Profilen for hospitaler lægger sig tæt op af DGNBs kerne Der er ikke fundet problemer, som ikke kan løses Teknikgrupperne vil kunne anbefale langt de fleste ændringer Eksperter på hospitalsbyggeri og drift vil blive inviteret med i processen