-
Introduction
You may find, on a renovation of an existing building, that many interior elements, such as walls, ceilings and doors, are in perfectly good condition and do not need to be replaced. This credit awards you 1–2 points for refinishing and reusing 40%–60% of these elements. The calculation for this credit is a function of the total interior elements present upon construction completion, including both the existing and the new non-structural building components used in the project.
Building restoration may be labor-intensive, but reusing buildings and their interior components extends the life cycle of an existing structure and mitigates the impacts of extraction, manufacturing and transportation of raw materials when compared to new building construction. In addition to...
Step-by-step credit help
Got the gist of the LEED credit but not sure how to actually achieve it? LEEDuser gives step-by-step help. Members get:
- Checklists covering all the key action steps you'll need to earn the credit.
- Hot tips to give you shortcuts and avoid pitfalls.
- Cost tips to assess what a credit will actually cost, and how to make it affordable.
- Ideas for going beyond LEED with best practices.
- All checklists organized by project phase.
- On-the-fly suggestions on useful items from the Documentation Toolkit, Resources, and Credit Language.
-
Credit language straight from USGBC
Need to check up on the exact LEED credit language from the LEED Rating System on the fly? LEEDuser includes the verbatim language. Members get:
- Easy access to the official LEED credit language with just a couple of clicks.
- On the jobsite without your bulky LEED Reference Guide? Check up on the credit language details here.
- Credit language content is used by permission of the U.S. Green Building Council.
Your credit-by-credit reference library
Why waste time chasing down referenced standards and supporting resources when LEEDuser links you directly to the ones you need? LEEDuser has gathered all the best tools out there and organized them by credit for easy reference. Members get links to:
- Organizations that can give information or help on a credit.
- Standards or studies that are key reference points for credits and prerequisites.
- Articles that help explain important topics.
- Key documents or references for credit inputs.
- Software tools you can use to run calculations or simulations.
Documentation Toolkit
In the end, LEED is all about documentation. LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit saves you time and helps you avoid mistakes with:
- Calculators to help assess credit compliance.
- Tracking spreadsheets for materials purchases.
- Spreadsheets and forms to give to subs and other team members.
- Guidance documents on arcane LEED issues.
- Sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions.
- Examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects.
30 Comments
Exterior and Party Walls
The elements of "Exterior and Party Walls" include shell or not? It seems to be exterior walls seperated from outdoor and party walls seperated from other spaces. But in the credit requirements, it requires to maintain NON-SHELL components. So the exterior wall should be excluded?
Another question: if the tenant occupies the whole floor and the party wall is the building core wall (concrete wall enclosing elevators, AHU1.Air-handling units (AHUs) are mechanical indirect heating, ventilating, or air-conditioning systems in which the air is treated or handled by equipment located outside the rooms served, usually at a central location, and conveyed to and from the rooms by a fan and a system of distributing ducts. (NEEB, 1997 edition) 2.A type of heating and/or cooling distribution equipment that channels warm or cool air to different parts of a building. This process of channeling the conditioned air often involves drawing air over heating or cooling coils and forcing it from a central location through ducts or air-handling units. Air-handling units are hidden in the walls or ceilings, where they use steam or hot water to heat, or chilled water to cool the air inside the ductwork. room etc. Then the party wall will be structural wall. But in the credit requirements, it requires to maintain NON-structural components. So the concrete party wall should be excluded in the calculation?
Shirong, the key thing we are looking at in this credit is the surface area of walls, etc.. So you can include party walls insofar as you are including the surface area of the wall that is within the tenant space.
Project Specific Questions
Please help advise for these two questions. Thanks!
For interior brick wall finishes, would it be acceptable to count them as a reused finish if they are not to be refinished or painted?
In our main gallery, the carpet has been abated and a concrete finish is to remain. We are going to polish the concrete and possibly re-stain. I assume we are not able to count the concrete as a reused finish because we are “upgrading” it with the polish and stain?
Lauren, did you submit and get a ruling on these issues? I am particularly curious about the refinished concrete.
Asbestos removal
My project is removing asbestos that is included in a wall system and replacing the gypsum board but retaining the structural system beneath it. For this credit, can I exclude the initial areas of the asbestos contained walls as part of my denominator value? I could have sworn I saw 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 about this a while back but can't put my finger on it.
I've seen the same information. Here's what LEED HC says: "Hazardous materials that are remediated as part of the project scope shall be excluded from the calculation of the percentage maintained." 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/LI 5583 from 8/2002 also allows you to exclude from MRc2 calcs. Have you searched the Reference Guide addenda?
Thanks Susan. That's my sense too. I've looked through some of the addenda but may have missed it?
I did a quick search through the new LEED Interpretations and did not find it either. But the search should have popped up the LEED HC item and did not. Clearly I need more search practice.
Trying to bring this back into the forum discsusion again. Anyone know where I can reference as verification that my approach is acceptable?
Guidance from the GBCI confirming this approach:
“Although it is not specifically stated in any reference guide, addenda, or LEED Interpretation (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) for MRc1.2 in ID+C or BD+C, GBCI confirms that projects should exclude the hazardous materials completely from the calculation for this CI credit – both numerator and denominator. This is assumed through the guidance found in MRc1.1 (pg. 347 in the BD+C reference guide) which states, "Hazardous materials that are remediated as a part of the project must be excluded from the calculation of the percentage maintained," even though it is technically a separate but related credit. Also, it is discussed through LI# 5885 from 9/19/2005, even though this is not directly applicable to 2009 projects or CI projects at this time.”
Hooray! Official closure. Thanks for posting this.
Existing Finish
I looked through the reference guide for a definition of 'finished,' but I couldn't find one, so I'm hoping someone here can help: I have a CI project that is moving into a space that has existing polished concrete floors. They want to put carpet down on some of the floors and keep some as polished. No changes will be made to the concrete floors. Does the entire floor area count as a 'retained' area, or just the part that will not be covered by carpet at the end of the project?
Sara, I think that the intent would be to count the part not covered by carpet.
I have a question with similar facts.
In our project, all of the flooring system will remain but all of the carpeting will be replaced with new carpets. I guess this means that the entire floor area does NOT count as retained?
Also, all of the drop ceiling system will remain but the current fluorescent lighting system will have some changes made to it. The reflective shields may be reused but the ballasts and fixtures will be replaced since the fluorescent bulbs will be changed to more efficient ones, i.e. T12 to T8 or T5 (will have to confirm). Does this mean that the entire ceiling area WOULD count as retained?
And only a small number of non-bearing walls will be removed.
Would this project be eligible for 0 points, 1 point, 2 points? Any tips would be appreciated.
"Other Non-structural Elements" covered elsewhere??
The project we are working on is looking to take advantage of MRc1.2 Building Reuse. However, this credit seems to only cover the basic non-structural elements - walls, floors, ceiling etc.
Is there any credit that covers "other non-structural elements," including electrical, mechanical and plumbing components? Our project retained a large amount of electrical fixtures and wiring, and spent very little in purchasing new fixtures. I am not aware of any credit that would cover these other elements in the same way that MRc1.2 does. Or would this be something we should pursue as “Innovation in Design”? Any input would be helpful. Thanks!
Gail, I agree that existing credits do not cover this, with the possible exception of MRc2. It has been a conscious choice for LEED not to cover mechanicals in this way, so I am doubtful that it would be allowed as an ID credit.
Suggestions for Calculating Casegood area
We have a library project that is reusing metal shelving. Since it is being used for the same purpose this credit indicates it should be part of MR1.2. Should the surface area be calculated as if it were a solid box? (i.e. top and sides) or should I calculate actual exposed surfaces area (i.e. each top and bottom of each shelf, all the parts of the bookcase that touches the air)? I hope that makes sense. Thank you.
James, the guidance in the LEED Reference Guide, page 224, seems pretty clear—determine the finished area, like a painter. This is similar to the guidance for LEED-NC, which says to use visible surface area. It seems like you'll get a lot of surface area out of this.... too good to be true? But I would proceed in that fashion.
Demountable Partitions - Walls or Furniture or neither?
Our Project is trying to decide whether Demountable Partitions that are being reused for CI Project should contribute to MRc1.2 for Building Reuse or MRc3.2 Furniture Reuse. As they are Div. 10, we are leaning toward MRc3.2 (although Furniture is Div. 12), but the partitions obviously act like a wall, so that would contribute to MRc1.2. We are assuming we can use them to contribute to MRc5 calculations. Anyone have any experience with this scenerio?
thanks!
There was a credit interpretation about demountable partitions (EQc3.2, 12/1/07) that states, "Full height, demountable modular walls are essentially the same in form and function as permanent wals and as such are not considered funiture...Please note that such modular walls potentially affect other LEED credits (such as daylighting and views) and should therefore be included in any calculations and submissions required for those credits as well."
Caveats? Twofold - first this was a NC 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, so I am not sure how it applies to CI. Secondly, USGBC has indicated that they are not bound by LEED v2 CIRs in LEED v3.
Conflict with the Intent!
At first I thought we had this credit in the bag because we were maintaining somewhere around 70% of existing walls, floors, ceilings, etc. That is to say-what was in our space to begin with (that was non-structural and non-shell) was mostly being reused. After getting into the form on LEED Online, it seems to be a whole different story! Apparently I have to enter in not only what was existing and what was retained but also what the final square footage of new construction was. This seems to me completely arbitrary and in direct conflict of the credit intent and language. " Maintain at least 40% or 60% by area of the existing non-shell and non-structural components." I don't understand what any new construction on my project has to do with what we reused that was already existing. Does anyone have guidance as to if I am interpreting this correctly or not? Or any experience in documenting this credit?
Thank you
-leslie
Leslie,
Page 225 of the CI reference guide might explain why this is happening, but the rationale is a bit confusing.
In the % reuse calculation, the "Total Retained Components Area (sf)" is the numerator. The denominator is *either* the "Prior Condition Area (sf)" OR the "Completed Design AreaCompleted design area is the total area of finished ceilings, floors, full-height walls and demountable partitions, interior doors, and built-in case goods in the completed project. It does not include exterior windows and doors. (SF)" depending on which is larger. (All areas are surface areas)
Say, in one scenario, you retain 900 sf of the existing 1000 sf of interior walls. You'd think your reuse would be 90%. But if you now build an additional 1000 sf of new interior walls, say for additional offices or conference rooms your reuse percentage goes down to 45%. That's not what I expected either.
The Ref. Guide states:
"By using the larger of the 2 values in the denominator, this equation puts projects that have minimized materials use in the completed design on a level playing field with projects that have optimized reuse of components from the prior condition."
Thus, projects that have optimized reuse of existing components only get credit for that if they *also* minimize materials in the completed design. The more materials are used in the completed design, the more your percentage of reuse will go down.
The credit requirements state: "Maintain at least 40% or 60% of the existing non-shell, non structural components (e.g., walls, flooring and ceiling systems. The minimum percentage interior component reuse for each point threshold is as follows: Interior Reuse: 40%, 1 point, 60%, 2 points."
I think many of us have interpreted "40% or 60% of existing" to mean we only look at the percent retained of the existing "Prior Condition Area," regardless of how much material surface area is in the final completed design. The requirements here don't say "have 40% or 60% of the Completed Design Area material area consist of Retained Components."
It's worth noting that in CI v2.0 Reference Guide the credit requirements and calculations for this credit are defined essentially the same as they are in CI 2009. And in NC 2.2, for credit 1.3 it says to "use existing interior non-structural elements in at least 50% of the completed building," which is what we're finding this credit to be pushing us toward. So there is a precedent for the credit working this way.
The credit intent is to "conserve resources, reduce waste and reduce environmental impacts of new buildings as they relate to materials manufacturing and transport." So maybe it's appropriate for a project that both reuses interior components AND adds little new material to score higher than a similar project that reuses the same amount of existing materials, but uses more total materials. But since I can't think of other credits where we earn points for using less material overall is than if we use more materials, it doesn't seem fair to hold back points for doing so only on those projects that are pursuing the building reuse credit.
Thank you David. This really helps explain the intent and clarifies what I should be calculating. I like the fact that they are rewarding reduced use of additional materials, I just had no idea that's what this credit was about until I read through the calculations in detail.
Can this Credit be achieved for a CI of a new CS building?
Assuming none or very little non-shell, non-structural componants...can this credit be attained?
On the one hand, this may not be seen as the primary intent of this credit, since during the initial build-out of a core and shell building there are not usually any existing tenant improvements (walls, ceilings, etc) to maintain.
On the other hand you might argue that it can be attained in some cases where there are non-structural elements provided by the landlord such as ceiling grids, corridor and core walls, etc, that the tenant is using as-is instead of demolishing or altering them.
Might be a judgement call! Another example of a time when it's good to have a few extra points more than your certification goal in case the reviewer sees it differently.
The one thing that you can usually count on with LEED credits, is following the intent of the credit. You definitely cannot earn the credit if there are zero non-shell, non-structural components. If it is a new CS building, it is highly unlikely that there would be sufficient interior elements to pass the "good faith" test of whether the credit is applicable to the project.
That is my feeling as well, but it would be could if someone could quantifiably "draw the line"...if someone from USGBC could put in a minimum % of area required to qualify (similar to LEED NC MRc1.2).
Right now I would say minimum 50% as in LEED NC...then I'm safe, but that's a bit harsh for a CS developement wanting to certify later spaces under CI.
Hi Jean,
After some more digging in the reference guide, I think I may need to reverse my answer a bit. An example is given in the ref guide "If the ceiling is exposed, both prior to construction and in the final design, include this area". This makes me think that it does not matter what is there to begin with, what matters is whether or not you retain it. If it is an exposed concrete floor at construction, and the project team retains that- then it counts. My apologies on the first response, that was wrong. Based on my re-reading, this project is eligible for a core and shell building, it would just need to retain that existing finish.
Documentation and Tabulation of Areas
If ever there was an arguement for the use of BIM software like Revit or ArchiCAD, this credit is it. Schedules can be created to tabulate exactly the data oen needs to document this credit, and documentation should be relatively easy with a reasonably accurate model.
What parameters would you set for the objects to create the schedule?
Please register to use the forum.