CI 2009 IEQc8.2: Daylight and Views—Views for Seated Spaces

Noriko, if I understand your question correctly—the space is the square footage of the room(s) in question.

Tristan, thank you for your prompt response.
My question is which area should be used net or gross for area calculation in EQc8.2.

It would be the space on the inside of the walls. There has been confusion on this issue because of the information required information i believe PLF 2 which requires the overall floorplate size, which will be a different number then that used in EQc 8.1 and 8.2. The table 8.1 in PLF 3 asks for the regularly occupied space which will only be used for those two credits.

Noriko, I would not count a smoking room as regularly occupied space—I would consider smoking more of a leisure activity, not study, work, or "other focused activities."

Initially i would go with Tristan and say that the smoking room would not be considered regularly occuppied. It is similar to a break room, which can be excluded.

However, you are providing windows for the space, and if the design intentA written document that details the ideas, concepts, and criteria that are determined by the owner to be important to the success of the project. was to provide occupants a space where they could smoke and enjoy views and daylight, then include in your calculations.

I don;t think a reviewer would question your decision either way with this one as long as the inclusion of thsi space determines credit achievement or not.

It is my understanding that break rooms are explicitly called out as non-regularly occupied and MUST be excluded. This is a break room. Many break rooms are provided with views and daylight and this does not change their classification as regularly occupied or not. I would caution using this as ROS. If you do, I would include a detailed narrative of your argument for it and please, report back here on how it went!

As long as you are consistent with the inclusion and exclusion of spaces they should not be any issues. I've never had any issues when including non-regularly occupied spacesRegularly occupied spaces are areas where one or more individuals normally spend time (more than one hour per person per day on average) seated or standing as they work, study, or perform other focused activities inside a building. in the calculations. I have not read that you MUST not include these spaces. If you are consistent and providing views and daylight to more spaces then required, you are going above the intent and requirements in my opinion. I don;t a reviewer would question this, as long as you are consistent.

I've always wondered why break rooms have been allowed to be excluded from the calculations. Here is a space that is provided to workers to rest or eat lunch so why wouldn't you provide them daylight and views. This would especially be significant in buildings where workers live in cubicle land and may not have any relevant eye relief from their computer screens except when on break.

I agree. I think it's strange that break rooms are not considered in the daylight calculations, but it does say that regularly occupied spacesRegularly occupied spaces are areas where one or more individuals normally spend time (more than one hour per person per day on average) seated or standing as they work, study, or perform other focused activities inside a building. are where people are working. And, I guess if you are working in an office that has daylight and views, you don't necessarily need daylight and views in your break room. Still, it seems counter intuitive.

I see what you are saying about including non-regularly occupied spaces. It is a good argument. Glad to hear that you have not had issues with it.

The intent is to provide a clear line of sight, and translucent glass would obstruct the view.

However, if you programmed the panels of the workstations to be positioned perpendicular to the window, there be still clear Line Of Sight for all, right?

Steve,
Only if the partition panel that ran parallel to the window wall was clear glass from 42" up or the panel was shorter then 42".

Todd, you are right, actually we are both right. I was referring to the systems furnitureSystems furniture includes panel-based workstations comprising modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components, and drawer and filing components or a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert. panel being perpendicular to the window wall, not parallel. If perpendicular, all occupants should have access to daylight view. If parallel, any panels above the 42" plumb must be in clear glazing.

Ruben, I would say that although the view you describe isn't a "quality view" in the words of a proposed LEED 2012 credit, it is a view to the outdoor environment, and should qualify.

Gail, I have not heard of a lot of projects documenting EP for this credit, and with those who have done so, it seems to bring up just the sort of challenges you are facing. I have looked around before and not found expert resources who were on top of these questions.

Please post back here to share your knowledge as you go!

Hi Gail,

I am in the process of documenting this credit for the first time as well. Have you looked at the LEED Online form yet? It says you can either submit separate floor plans for each measure or submit them all in one drawing. I'm doing them separately to make it easier. For the first measure I drew multiple view lines to show which areas have them and hatched the areas that did not have multiple view lines. For the second measure I plan on doing the same, keeping the initial view lines and then just hatching the areas that don't have views to human activity, vegetation, etc. I'm hoping this will be enough to show compliance!

For the actual definition of human activity, I think it just means you have a view of people walking/doing things outside?? I'm not quite sure and the reference guide doesn't have a clear definition. Also it says "70 feet from exterior glazing" not "70% of exterior glazing" which probably means you need to be able to see objects 70 feet from the windows.

I took a look at the view factor measure but don't really understand it and feel it would be the most difficult to document. Sorry I can't help with that part! After the design review hopefully I can give you some more feedback.

You're asking whether the exterior SF can be considered for this credit?

Conventionally speaking I would say not, because it wouldn't normally be counted as occupied space according to LEED. If you wanted to cout it, I think that would hinge on whether it's considered "regularly occupied."

What is the view from the courtyard? It would have to be a view outside to count.

It is common on this campus that exterior spaces are used on all but the most inclement days. It serves as outdoor classroom, student study and lounge as well as reception area. So I'm thinking it WOULD be considered regularly occupied area. What do you think?

Hi Sue!

If you can perhaps achieve the credit without including the "outdoor classroom" it seems that would be best/easier to avoid confusion. While I agree that exterior spaces can be utilized in this manner, you might have to consider that this area (square footage) will likely need to be included throughout your project submission for other related credits (i.e. EAp2/c1, IEQp1, IEQc6.1 & 6.2, IEQc8.1, etc.)

If you feel that this space will be 'regularly occupied' and the project design specifically intended this area to be used as a classroom then you might submit a project specific CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide to confirm and/or ensure that the area/square footage is utilized and accounted for consistently across all project submittals and documentation.

Hope helpful.

Thanks Carlie
I do know it would be easier to avoid the concept of outdoor space due to complications with all the credits, and may submit a CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide.
But at some point there should be an avenue within LEED to address this sort of situation of functional outdoor area- not using any energy to operate....
Happy Holidays to you!

I don't often say this, but I think there could be potential here under IDc1. You have a project feature with multiple benefits that is not addressed under an existing credit. Perhaps look at LEED for Healthcare SSc9.1 or SSc9.2 for inspiration?

Steve,
In your example described above this would mean that regularly occupied spacesRegularly occupied spaces are areas where one or more individuals normally spend time (more than one hour per person per day on average) seated or standing as they work, study, or perform other focused activities inside a building. (areas where workers are seated or standing as they work inside a building) 15 feet from the curtain wall inside the building in plan and section would need to be included in the EP calculation.

You may also want to check out a similar question asked under 'Schools v2009 IEQc8.2' discussion thread dated11/02/10. Hope helpful!

Christian, the credit requirements clearly fcall for a view to the "outdoor environment." If the courtyard is open, then it should be okay, if closed, not. That sounds a bit arbitrary, but I think it's how the credit is currently written (looks like it will change in 2012 version). You could try a CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide if you want to argue for a different "view."