Alicia,
The word "rides" has caused a lot of confusion. What they mean is the frequency - the number of times per day a bus stops at that particular stop.

You can read my more detailed response to the posting "Transit Rides" below on Nov 15, 2011 for more information. I hope that explains it!

My understanding is that nay shuttle needs to act in a similar way to that of public transit. An expert from LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. # 10003, "a private mini-bus may be counted towards credit compliance if it is available to the public, travels a regular route and observes a regular time schedule. If the mini-bus behaves more like a group taxi, in that the route and timetable is determined by the occupants, then it is not eligible to be counted towards credit compliance."

For your project, I would say that as long as the shuttle is open to the staff and visitors [you will have to argue why this is not open to the public, as it is a private campus -- I wouldn't think you'd have a tough time], has a regular time schedule, and a published route, it would fulfill the credit requirements. I would think you'd only have to document its schedule, route, and accessibility to campus users. You will also have to document what it is connecting to [bus stops, train station, city centre, etc.]

Dear Matthew,
thank you for your kind response. I've already prepared a narrative describing how the shuttle will operate (time schedules, capacity, bus stop locations, etc.) and why the campus is private (it is an industrial campus after all). My only doubt is regarding the "2 or more (...) lines" because the shuttle is only one line even though it connects with bus interface with several bus lines and train station. Do you think it will be counted as one line only or it will guarantee full credit compliance?

Check out this 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 response (#000400005578) :
If the project can provide permanent shuttle service that connects building occupants directly to one rail station or to one or more bus stops serving two or more bus lines within a reasonable distance (4 miles) of the project, then it may be eligible for this credit. If a shuttle is used, provide information on the distance to bus routes and to building(s), schedule and frequency of operation, and shuttle capacity. Schedule and frequency must be adequate to service employee ridership during standard commuting times for all shifts.

Pedro, please see ID#100001163 MADE ON 04/01/2012:
"Shuttle buses should provide direct access to transit facilities within 2 miles of the project site, approximately a 5-10 minute drive, and must be available to all project occupants."
Also, several 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's and LI-s are dealing with this issue (what frequency is ok, etc.) check: http://www.usgbc.org/leed-interpretations
Deborah, that CIR you mention might have lost its validity now. There was also an interpretation ID#5179 MADE ON 01/23/2009 where a bus line 4 miles away was not accepted altough connected by a shuttle.

I think you've met the credit intent. The bus lines serve different parts of the city, right? Then you have 12 bus stops across the street. As for EP credit, you'll want to look at total available rides. There should be information about that on LEED User.

Tiffany,  my take on this is that it doesn't meet the letter of the LEED requirements, but that it does seem to be an factor that opens up more options for occupants with pretty much equivalent convenience to the credit requirements. If you emphasize this and the credit intent, I think it could be accepted by the LEED reviewer.

If you need it to be, that is, don't you already earn the credit without that? Or are you going for EP?

Thanks, Tristan. Yes, we are going for EP on this one. I can actually make this work using the campus shuttle, but it takes a longer route. I think I can narrate this to meet the intent by showing that students could get to the additional bus that way, but are more likely to use the transfer, which is faster.

(Technically, they are going to walk the additional .02 miles and just get on the bus they want, right?)

I appreciate the feedback.

I have one more question on the shuttle documentation for EP. In the process of counting rides, do we include the number of rides for the shuttle that picks the students up AND the number of rides provided by the public bus they are shuttled to? That seems to be a potential "double-dip", but I haven't seen any guidance on this aspect.

Just basing my answer on common sense without double-checking documentation requirements, but it does seem like a double dip.

Andrew, as long as you otherwise meet the credit requirements, which focus on proximity to stations, I don't think you'll have any problem as far as LEED documentation is concerned. This is based on my reading of the credit, not on experience with the situation.

From what you've described, it sounds like your site is served by multiple options for public transit with a high level of service. It’s not clear how much of that has been documented for the reviewer to prompt their question. It seems like some reviewers are sticking to a very literal reading of the credit requirements and may be less likely to consider other situations as having an equivalent level of performance. True, there are so many variables in these special situations it can be hard to convince someone that the level of public transit service is equivalent or better to what you’d get from 2 bus lines stopping within a quarter mile of your project.

Maybe that’s part of the narrative you need to assemble: create a “baseline” comparison, where you site your building in a reasonably busy part of town with access to two bus lines (don’t choose a site that just barely complies). Show the number of rides/ trips provided per day, and maybe map the geographic extent of those two bus lines to estimate the square miles or % of the metropolitan area that is served by those lines. Then do the same for your site, and show the number of transit routes, rides/ trips, and geographical area your users can access using the shuttles that will link to the terminal and the rail station. It seems reasonable to expect airline travelers to be more willing to use shuttles and transfer more than once; they do that even to rent a car, and many airports rely on shuttle loops and intermediate connections to larger transit networks.

Hope that helps – ask any other questions and keep us posted on what you hear!

Check out LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. #10004 made on 05/09/2011, it allows a bus line that connects to major transit system to meet the credit requirements.

Hard to say - you can submit this and see how it goes, but you may want another ID credit as backup in case this gets denied. It seems like the exemplary performanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. language wouldn't use a different method for calculating the distance.

Erin,
I haven't heard of any alternative distance being used for a university. You could always 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, but I think you'd need to cite a specific transit use research study or something official to make your case that students will walk farther.

Valentin, it seems like this meets the credit intent and should be allowed.

Yes, if you have bus line(s) with .25 mile and subway(s) within .5 mile walking distances that should be okay. Make sure you can document the total number of transit lines within the radius and the frequency that each line serves that location to show the 200 rides per day.

If the LEED project boundary is a conference center open to the public then we probably can't count the school buses as a second line, since as you point out, they aren't available to the public users of the LEED certifying project. Is that the case?

The LEED Boundary encompasses both as both uses, conference center & school, are within the same building. There is also to be an after-hours continuing education program within the building. I am trying to establish if the buses will be used to shuttle these students or even the conference center particpants to locations off site. If this can be established will it satisfy the requirements of Option 2 as a Campus or Privately operated bus line per the definition within the LEED Reference Guide.

Since your situation isn't typical, and 6 points are at stake, you'd probably need 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 to know for sure. Alternatively, if you have enough "buffer points" you could document this with as much detail as possible and wait till the design review phase comes back with comments and see how it goes.

Have you seen interpretation # 2617 in the LEED Interpretations database? It addressed a military base with one shuttle bus and referred to an older 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 saying "Per CIR ruling dated 2/4/2003, and others, the single bus line serving the campus may be considered a shuttle if it connects riders with other mass transit options outside the military base.” See if that case was similar enough to your situation - sounds like it might be.

It's from LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. 532 (posted: 5/9/2003). Bascially boils down to the following requirements:
The project must earn at least three of the four available SSc4 credits, document at a least a five-year commitment to the noted transit programs in your TMP, and provide documentation that the policies/procedures that ensure the same service for new employees (as well as confirming the number of current employees provided with the service).

Thanks Kristina,
That is one place I did not look. I find it interesting that the interpretation was from 2003 yet not integrated into the language of LEED NC 2009. We are looking at additional options to submit for another SS4 credit to achieve a new point and the exemplary point. Thanks for the assistance.

Thanks Julie and Kristina for pointing this out. I don’t remember seeing that ruling.

This is a little unsettling, since #532 is an old 2.0 or 2.1 ruling that lists many very specific requirements for a TMP that have not been made part of the 2009 language, nor is it one of the interpretations listed in the new USGBC site Credit Library for SSc4.1. It says it was updated by a Sept 2006 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 I can’t find that CIR.

True, looking at ruling #532 in the Interpretations database, the Applicability tab indicates for version 2009 "Project teams and reviewers may refer to the ruling for projects using this rating system, if reasonable and appropriate" (one check). Whereas for version 2.0 projects "the ruling was written for projects using this rating system and must be applied based on the project's registration date" (two check marks).

Among the many other listed requirements for a comprehensive TMP, the ruling says we would need to earn 4.1, 4.2, and 4.4 if we want the comprehensive Transit Management Plan to earn one ID point. Thus a TMP only qualifies if it meets the bike rack and showers requirements of 4.2, which seems reasonable, but also *must* meet the credit 4.4 limits on parking capacity? That’s not stated in any addenda.

I can agree in principle that having a lot of parking can work against a comprehensive TMP to reduce driving. But a number of cases such as an existing garage or parking lot, retail or programmatic issues might preclude 4.4 even when many other “comprehensive” measures are being taken.

It seems relevant that when ruling #532 was made, SSc4.1, 4.2 ,4.3, and 4.4 were all worth only one point each. Under NC 2009, credit 4.1 is worth (6) points, 4.2 is worth (1) point, and 4.4 is worth (2) points. To earn (1) ID point on top of the (6) for 4.1, it doesn’t seem reasonable and appropriate to require both 4.2 and 4.4 as well, when that is just one of many requirements listed in an interpretation from 2006 that reviewers “may refer to” but isn’t indicated as “must apply” and doesn’t seem to appear anywhere else.

It’s a difficult situation - I can imagine reviewers are under pressure to be thorough so a LEED rating maintains its credibility as rigorous. And even building code officials will interpret very precise language differently. But the Reference Guide language was not written with the rigor and thoroughness of code language, and there have been so many different locations of credit requirements, MPRs, addenda, CIRs, interpretations, Supplemental Guidance documents, and no single list of definitions.

I’m very glad to see the new USGBC website is starting to address a lot of that confusion with one central glossary and the Credit Library, but that is still a work in progress. Until the Credit Library is complete and requirements are clearly communicated, I think it can be counter productive for reviews to ask projects to meet the “letter of the law” of old interpretations that only have one check mark in the applicability tab, that says reviewers “may refer to” and not “must apply.”

It seems “reasonable and appropriate” to “refer to” a ruling to give project teams different options for complying with a credit when the Reference Guide and addenda are vague, or to clarify the credit intent in a new and unforeseen situation. I imagine there have been many comprehensive TMPs accepted that didn’t meet the long list of requirements in ruling #532 but still met the intent of the credit.

Ok, rant over.

The preliminary review comments that I just got back also reference LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. 532 and when I look it up in online the ruling begins "NOTE: This 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 has been updated by LEED-NCv2.1 SSc4.1 CIR ruling dated 9/22/2006" but I cannot find any credit dated 9/22/2006. Does anyone know the interpretation number of the updated CIR being referenced?

I think you are looking for LI#1597, dated 9/22/2006, and applicable to SSc4.1.

There may be a typo in the 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 ruling #532 that makes it hard to find the interpretation dated 9/22/2006. Searching by date, all I could find was interpretation #1597 written for CI SSc3.1 not NC SSc4.1, but since those are both the Alt Transit - Public Transit Access credits, that shouldn't matter.

What's confusing, though, is #1597 addresses exemplary performanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. for an ID point by having access to quadruple the number of transit rides, and doesn’t say anything about transit management plans. It may be that #1597 is intended to supplement ruling #532 by providing an additional way to earn an ID point besides using a comprehensive TMP, but that’s not entirely clear.

It seems like it would depend on the Amtrak route. A few of them do serve as commuter rail; most of those routes are located in the northeast, and are labeled "express" or "regional" routes. But, Amtrak's usual long-distance routes wouldn't meet the LEED definition for public transportation: to "operate on a regular, continual basis".

I agree with Eric, it would depend a lot on the station and what level of service is provided. Some stations might only serve a few long-distance lines with only a few stops per day, while other stations could have both long distance and local trains with more frequent arrivals & departures. You'd need to make a good case that a reasonable number of people use it for daily commuting.

Eric,
My understanding of that paragraph is the CTMP "could" be used to document all four SSc4 credits if it is detailed enough to address the specific requirements of all four credits, not just their intent. It might be analogous to the Master Site credits in the AGMBC, where you document once how you are meeting all the requirements and then refer back to that master credit on relevant campus projects.

Since this language is in a paragraph that begins with "Consider developing a transportation management plan that...." and is in the Section 4. Implementation, rather than Section 6. Calculations or 9. Exemplary PerformanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements., I think it’s been offered as a general suggestion, not an alternative compliance path, for approaching all four credits when more than one building will be sharing these common transit resources. I imagine you’d still be filling out credit forms for each credit, but could reference the one CTMP to show how you are meeting all requirements.

Does that answer your question?

Yes, I believe I understand. A CTMP must address the specific requirements of SSc4.1-4. Anything less (i.e. meeting the intent but not necessarily the requirements) would be considered an Alternative Compliance Path, and therefore subject to all of the risks inherent in that approach.

I'm not sure if I completely agree. Of course, if you want to have your project's CTMP address all four SSc4 credits, you can. But I am not convinced that it must address all four in a LEED positive way. For example, if your master plan includes building a parking garage, SSC4.4 - add no new parking is shot, especially for any project that serves shift workers (assuming this will put you over zoning). I would think that programs that enhance alternative transportation but don't earn a LEED innovation credit alone have a place in the CTMP and can be very engaging from the owner's point of view. Agree with David on having to fill out each credit form.

In submitting a CTMP is it possible to recover points (other than the exemplary performanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. point) for SSC4.1 without meeting the requirements listed in the credit language? Our project is located in a village without any bus public buses. Even if we work with other organizations in the community to set up a shuttle/bus system, it seems a far cry to reach 50 rides per day (a criteria I've seen references on this forum). However, implementing any form of public transportation would represent a huge improvement over current conditions as it would not only improve access to our site but throughout the greater community as well. Does this seam like feasible approach? In this case would it still be 0 OR 6 credits? Are there any particular criteria we should keep in mind as we set up such a system and develop our CTMP? Thanks!

Robert, you'd have an easier time earning an EP point using a CTMP for another SSc4 credit. It's not really allowed to earn an EP point for a credit that you didn't earn, and you couldn't really earn the credit unless you meet the credit requirements.

Since your project is a military base with restricted access, you have additional flexibility in defining the shuttle as public and not private.

Did the review comments imply that the routes had to be operational by the time the building becomes occupied? Is that possible for you to show?

Without a specific example handy, since the context can vary so much from project to project, you might want to contact the planning department, transit agency, or your local government elected official and ask if they have any master plan, ordinance, or council ruling that would show the station is planned and funded.

The terms "lines," "stops" and "rides" have confused people, and these haven't been clearly defined. Interpretation Ruling #5020 comes close, and is integrated into to 2009 Reference Guide Option 2 for Exemplary PerformanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements.. Here's a long-winded attempt to clear up any confusion:
Our understanding has been: Rides = (number of times per day a bus on line #1 serves it's bus stop nearest the project) + (number of times per day a bus on line #2 serves its bus stop nearest the project) etc. Include all bus lines that serve bus stops that are within a .25 mile walk from the project entry or entries. The number of seats on the bus isn't taken into account.
Looking at the 2009 BD&C Reference Guide page 45, the diagram shows one bus stop for the #16 bus line on Cass Ave, and another bus stop for the #53 bus line on Woodward Ave. (The 2009 first edition has a .25 mile radius circle drawn, but an addenda removed the circle and adds a scale to require the .25 miles to be walking distance.)
This implies that a bus line serves a specific route or destination. But in the diagram is the #16 bus assumed to be heading in just in one direction or two? If buses travel in both directions, does that make it one line or two? We assume if it travels in both directions this still counts as one bus line, since you need both directions of travel to complete your trip. If a bus line only serves one direction, it would probably still count as one line, but contribute fewer number of rides per day.
Or put another way, for a person leaving a LEED project, how many routes do they have to choose from and how frequently do those buses or trains stop? Each time one person could board a bus from the LEED project site counts as a "ride."
For example, let's assume the #16 travels both northbound and southbound along Cass Ave. (Google Maps indicates it actually does). Let's assume it stops every 15 minutes in both directions from 6 am to midnight. That's 4 times per hour for 18 hours, or 72 rides going north, and another 72 rides going south, for a total of 144 rides.
Whew!

Jean,
Looking at the BD&C Reference guide pgs 41 - 45, my understanding is they're looking for a site plan drawing that highlights the path that pedestrians and bikes will use to get to the nearest transit stops.

If there was no sidewalk or dedicated bike lane, students might not have a route to the transit stops that is protected from car traffic. So, we'll want to show any sidewalks or other paths that provide protection. We could indicate the width to show it's wide enough for both walkers and bikers and indoctae how it provides protection, such as a marked bike lane or zone for parked cars that separates traffic lanes from pedestrian lanes.

Does that answer your question?

Ideally, these paths would go all the way to the transit stops, but it looks like the credit language recognizes the school may have difficulty influencing the public paths beyond their property boundary.

My google earth showes dedicated bicycle and foot path lanes to the local transit links (underground stations x2) from the school main entrance where the bike racks are in many directions...I've highlighted these and wrote a text explaining the situation. Hope this does the trick. Should I include arrows showing 2-way traffic for bikes?

It sounds like your site meets the requirements. Yes, it is probably good to show that bikes can travel in both directions, since you've been asked for clarifications once already.

Alicia,

I do not think that LEED is trying to penalize projects with open space, they are rather trying to encourage siting the project as close to public transportation as possible. 

To answer your question, I think it may be possible to submit alternative compliance to use the site enterance if the site is entirely closed off, say a military base. I have not seen this documented as successful, however, and if your site is not closed off it is unlikley you will be able to use anything but the building enterance.

Alicia, how did you go with this? I have a similar situation in a project, nevertheless it is located in what you could call a campus and existing buildings are surrounding the project site. We are certifying it as a single building, not as a campus, though. Would it be possible to claim something similar? Have you sent the review already?

I'm also interested in hear more opinions about this subject. I'm currently working on a project located at an industrial campus. If I measure the distance between building entrance and the bus stop credit requirements will not be met (by a short distance). If the measurement is made from the entrance of the campus (it is a private industrial campus) credit requirements will be fulfilled. Can I consider the campus entrance to measure the distance?

Our Project is entirely closed off by a gate. At the entrance of the gate, we have a small building which is the main entrance to the site. This small building consists of a guardhouse, a waiting room and a toilet. Once employees enter through this gate, they can go to either one of the 2 major buildings on our site. Can we count the entrance at the guard house as the main entrance? If we do so, we comply with the máximum distance. If we add the distance from the guard house to either of the buildings we are just outside of the range (by +-20m) Does anyone see a problem with that. Anyone has experience with a similar submittal or any 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?
Thanks

Jill,
You might look at the intent of the exemplary performanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. requirements as twofold: provide more frequent service, and serve a greater area.
I'm not sure the A and B variants would count as two separate lines if the buses follow exactly the same geographic route. It could be argued that although the stop skipping reduces the travel time, it doesn't seem to serve a greater area. I think the intent of requiring 4 or more routes for exemplary performance is to serve a greater geographic area than would be served by two or three routes. If the A and B route stops are sufficiently far apart or serve different streets during part of their route, you might be able to demonstrate that they serve different riders, and thus a greater area. Does that make sense?