Choose your own adventure:
The current version of LEED Online was originally developed for LEED v4 projects and released in 2014.
The current LEED Online is the third version, after LEED Online v2 and LEED Online v3. (For those of us who have been working with LEED for over a decade, I guess LEED Online v1 was considered the Excel spreadsheet and Word document combo we used after the original paper 3-ring binder submittals.)
USGBC’s goals for the current LEED Online platform have been to make it simple, adaptable, and singular—though launched for LEED v4 projects, LEED 2009 projects were later imported into it.
The upgrades to LEED Online have been positive, overall, but there have been bumps in the road. In December 2014, active project team administrators and members for commercial projects got notice on December 18th via email that LEED 2009 projects were being upgraded in only 10 days to the new LEED Online. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! I frantically saved all my projects’ LEED documentation as backup. While my teams didn’t have any problems with the platform change, many teams did (see the pages of comments under this USGBC post ).
On the plus side, USGBC has been proactive in adding messages to its homepage and LEED Online homepage to notify teams about ongoing site maintenance and downtime.
Despite the initial hiccups, I’ve been pleased with the new platform. And after I got over my initial reservations about the lack of control for Project Administrators (although I do use Exclusive Access on all my projects to assign credits), I am enjoying the benefits of its more open architecture and the streamlined interface. (I do stress to my teams to please never push the big blue Submit for Review button.)
The road icon here provides access to the useful Activity Log.I use the Activity Log to help overcome some of the loss of control that is a side effect (or benefit) of the open architecture. It’s handy to log on and see at a glance who has been doing what for all my projects. And it’s useful to see the history of activity for an individual project or credit. (The Activity Log is what appears at the top of the Projects page when you log in (if you didn’t hide it via the Project Settings). To access it within a project, click the road icon on the Details page, as shown in the screen capture.
On the credits page, the road icon for the Activity Log appears next to the Credit library button when you click a credit name.On the credits page, the road icon appears next to the Credit library button when you click a credit name (see screen capture).
I’ve learned to live with the auto-save feature of the forms. (Thank goodness it never went down to the originally proposed two minutes, and we still have a more reasonable 10 minutes.)
And I’ve trained my teams to use the Back button in Internet Explorer to exit out of a form without saving. I tell them to just ignore the pop up that “entered form data will may be lost” and select “Leave this page.” When in doubt, click “Stay on this page.”
The "X" will close and save your form, which isn't always desirable.(USGBC hasn’t taken my suggestion to change the X icon and its associated tooltip in the upper right hand corner of the form page. When you hover over the X, the tooltip text says “Close Form and Back to credits page.” Unfortunately it doesn’t just close the form, it saves it also. To Windows users, an X icon means close. To me it is counterintuitive to push the X and then get the message that your form has been saved and then the form closes. Right next to the X is a disk icon, which saves the form but doesn’t close. I wish USGBC would change the tooltip to “Save Form and Back to credits page.” What I’d really rather see is the X icon actually just close the form without saving.)
LEEDuser will post regular updates on LEED Online below in reverse chronological order.
USGBC’s technology department was busy making visible and backend changes to LEED Online over the first weekend in February 2017 when LEED Online and USGBC websites were offline.
The biggest change was opening up new precertification options for v2009 rating systems other than Core & Shell as this USGBC article foretold for LEED v4 projects. Only projects that have the v06+ forms (those registered after January 1, 2016) and have not gone for a review will see the precertification option in the Certification timeline. Teams will change the timeline from the Combined or Split to Precert + Combined or Precert + Split.
Projects registered before January 1, 2016 who have the pre-v06 forms can still use the precertification option but they must consent to the project’s forms being upgraded to v06+. But before clicking the Confirm button, teams should back up any data in LEED Online.
Ever had your project’s square footage increase substantially between the Design and the Construction Application submittals? Previously the invoice that you received for the Construction Application wasn’t very clear that there was an additional charge for the Design Application too. USGBC’s technology team addressed this by making the invoice more user-friendly and explaining the additional charge by highlighting the previous square footage used in the Design Application.
Lastly, the technology team added a new option under Project Registration for K-12 schools for data tracking. Similar to the checkbox for identifying a project affiliated with a LEED Lab, a K-12 school can identify its affiliation with a K-12 school district. When checked, a new field appears to let the team enter the K-12 school district name as it appears in the National Center for Education Statistics database.
Unlike the wholesale changes LEED users experienced in early 2016, you may not even notice the modifications USGBC made to LEED Online this holiday. As of January 1, 2017, USGBC’s technology department upgraded LEED Online to support separation of two functions: submitting a project for review and payment of LEED certification fee.
This functionality push allows the prepayment of certification fees that USGBC announced in November as part of the new LEED pricing effective December 1, 2016. Currently registered projects have until March 1, 2017 to complete certification or prepay certification fees in order to lock in the pre-December 2, 2016 pricing. As noted in the article, this is the first time USGBC has increased pricing since 2010.
Prior to this LEED Online adjustment, teams paid the certification fee when they submitted a project for review. With this update, these functions are separated so that teams can pay the certification fee and later submit the project for review. Teams will see this prepayment option as a button (Make Pre Payment) on the Certification Timeline (accessed via the Timeline button) for the Preliminary Review. Teams using a split review will see a new button for both the Design and Construction Preliminary Reviews and those using the combined review will see a single button on the Design and Construction Preliminary Review.
After clicking any of the Make Pre Payment buttons, teams will see the familiar payment page, which will be entitled Pre Payment for Review. Teams can then pay by credit card or check. While this functionality will not affect all teams, those who are prepaying certification fees will appreciate the change—as will those whose clients pay the fee separately.
Since last quarter, USGBC updated five offline calculators and one form for LEED 2009 and v4 projects. As previously noted, these updates are now outlined in the Quarterly Update and can be found in Addenda Database by using the Entry type filter and choosing “Form Update” from the dropdown menu. Users searching in the database should note that form updates are independent of the scheduled Quarterly Updates and released whenever changes are made, so some dates are earlier than the release date of the Quarterly Update.
For instance, all LEED 2009 and v4 BD+C and ID+C teams will benefit from the updates to the respective Minimum Energy Performance Calculators (for v2009 and v4) outlined in ID #5000062, which was updated in September 2016. In addition, BD+C: Data Centers and LEED 2009 data center projects will benefit from the updates to the Minimum Energy Performance Data Center Calculator outlined in ID #5000061. Teams working on O+M projects and using Case 2, Option 2 or Option 3 will benefit from fixes to the form outlined in ID #5000063. In addition for O+M projects, ID #5000064 provides a correction to the formula for weighted average for lamps in the Sustainable Purchasing Calculator.
USGBC updated 6 offline calculators for LEED 2009 and v4. And thanks to feedback, USGBC is now publishing calculator updates in its Addenda Database along with a description of changes. USGBC will also publish a summary of changes as part of the Quarterly Addenda Update.
Information LEEDuser posted about the LEED Online forms under January 2016 upgrades (see below) above didn’t quite tell the whole story. That, as it turns out, was due to USGBC not sharing it.
Due to questions and concerns raised on this forum, USGBC has published an article to enumerate what the v06 forms upgrade really means for LEED 2009 and v4 projects. For experienced LEED Online users, the changes roll back some of the features you’ve learned to depend on and utilize under the previous LEED Online version 3. We’ve summarized and expanded on some of the issues raised in the article.
Offline form functionality: Apparently users asked for this and they got it! (I’m not sure if it was folks harkening back to the LEED Online version 2 days when this was the way it worked or new users who wanted the ability to not be tethered all day to LEED Online.) Regardless, USGBC initiated many of the changes outlined below in the v06 forms update to ensure online and offline form functionality. Users can switch the way forms work via the credit form access mode.
Where is the credit form access mode and how do I switch? After you log into LEED Online, there is a gear icon that appears by your name on the first page.
This lets you adjust a variety of settings in LEED Online:
The last item is where you can change the credit form access mode (Online, Offline, or Auto). “Online” is the default setting and the way you’re used to working with the forms within LEED Online. “Offline” allows you to download an editable version of the credit form, which can be completed offline and then be uploaded to LEED Online. “Auto” allows LEED Online to decide which mode in relation to your browser configuration.
USGBC also posted a new help question - How do I access the credit forms offline?, which explains in more detail how to work with the offline forms and answers some frequently asked questions about offline forms.
Linkages between forms are gone: Due to the streamlining of the v06 forms and the new ability to work offline on the forms, LEED Online no longer shares data (auto-populates) between forms. You will no longer see the yellow highlight from previous form versions that identified this linked content. This means that Project Administrators will need to cross-check items (like square footage and occupancy) that they’ve taken for granted were (mostly) coordinated since the release of LEED Online version 3.
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 ID credits: Prior to the v06 forms update, Innovation in Design credits did not truly have their own PDF forms in LEED Online like other credits. Teams that were pursuing Exemplary Performance for SSc4.1, for example, identified this pursuit on the bottom of the SSc4.1 credit form and information flowed to a pulldown in the ID credits when the Exemplary Performance radio button was selected there. Now that ID credits have their own v06 forms and the linkages between forms have been removed, Project Administrators will need to track which credits are eligible for Exemplary Performance and initiate Exemplary Performance directly in the new v06 ID forms.
As noted under January 2016 (see below), these changes affect newly registered projects and newly attempted credits.
Upload button removed from forms: This is another big change that users will see. Previously the various uploads had numbers identifying them and you could upload directly from the Upload button on the form itself. Now, there are no upload numbers or specific upload areas related to those numbers. Users upload all items directly under Uploads button for each credit.
But how do I know what uploads are required? We heard a great idea for working with this new twist - multiple tabs in your web browser. Team members should consider having the credit form open in one browser tab and the Uploads page open in another. This will allow the user to refer back to the form while uploading documents and ensure all the required uploads have been included.
Will my uploads be cross-checked by LEED Online? No - Users will need to ensure that all required uploads have been included for a credit because the Check Form button (previously called Check Compliance) doesn’t check upload quantity anymore. The button name change of Check Form sums it up - it is only checking the form data for completeness.
Perform an additional quality control check required: Project Administrators will need to check the form and ensure their team members have included all the required uploads.
Utilize the updating sorting feature in the Uploads page: Project Administrators can also use the sorting feature (by file name, credit number/abbreviation, uploader, or uploaded date) on the project’s main Uploads page to help QC a project’s uploads.
For additional information on uploading or deleting files using the v06 forms: Check out the new help question for an illustrated guide and additional uploading tips for LEED 2009 and LEED v4 - How do I upload or delete files using the new LEED Online forms?
Streamlined documentation requirements emulate LEED v4: As you start working with the v06 forms, you will notice that certain backup that you are used to providing is no longer required. For what I’ve noticed at a first glance, this will affect contractors’ documentation for the MR material attribute credits (MRc3-7) and IEQ low-emitting materials credits (IEQc4.1-4.4) for LEED BD+C projects. Project Administrators should review the new forms to fully understand the impacts.
Precertification with a Split review (Precert + Split) is the new default stage for newly registered Core and Shell projects. You’ll see “Precertification Preliminary Application” displayed as the stage on the right side of the grey navigation bar under the Project Name and ID # in LEED Online. Teams can also utilize a Precert + Combined timeline. If your project is not going for precertification, opt out of this optional stage via the Timeline tab and change your review timeline to one without precertification - either Combined or Split.
In early 2016 LEED Online underwent additional upgrades to provide new functionality. Here are some highlights:
We’d like to use this forum to keep abreast of the current state of usability of LEED Online. What tips would share for the effectively working in LEED Online? Are there some great workarounds that you use? Have you had any problems with the new form upgrades? Please post your comments below.
Thought this might be a good place for this question/comment...
I logged into LEED Online this morning, as usual, through Firefox. I quickly figured out that the forms all of a sudden will not open. After some investigation, it seems that Firefox stopped supporting Adobe plugins as of yesterday, much like Chrome did back in Sept '15.
For me, this only leaves Internet Explorer that is compatible with being able to open/view/edit the forms while in the website.
Can anyone else confirm that this is the case for them, too?
Yep I always have to use IE for LEED Online.
But, just to make your head spin, the USGBC.org website does not work properly on IE -- I always have to use Chrome.
Emily - I've only used IE for LEED Online myself because it consistently has worked over the years. I reached out to USGBC Technology team to see if they have any insight into the Firefox change.
Erica - You are correct. USGBC was very clear when they revised its website years ago that it was optimized for Chrome. With IE, you can't see some of the symbols and icons (for videos for instance).
I wanted to take the opportunity to point out an Adobe issue that I noticed after reading Emily's post. When I ran Check System Requirements, I got an red X on Adobe Reader with the message: "LEEDOnline is not compatible with the latest Adobe Acrobat Reader DC version, please uninstall and install the Adobe Reader XI. Please click the link to install the Adobe Reader XI - https://get.adobe.com/reader/otherversions/." I don't have Adobe Reader DC - I have Adobe Acrobat Pro DC. I asked USGBC Technology if DC will ever be compatible.
I'll post more when I hear back.
Wanted to share this update from USGBC Technology team:
For those of you using Firefox 52, when you click Check System Requirements (https://lo.usgbc.org/index/systemRequirements) from the LEED Online log in page (https://lo.usgbc.org/), you should see the message: Firefox 52 onwards NPAPI Plugins (https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/software/mozilla-to-drop-support-f...) support has been dropped, so you may use the Firefox ESR (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/) release to continue to work with Adobe Plugin.
Emily - I don't have Firefox installed so I would be curious if you see this. USGBC Technology told me they had already updated the System Requirements in anticipation of the release of Firefox 52.
Regarding Adobe Reader DC, I was told USGBC is not supporting it as there is an issue accessing the web content from the plugin that is blocked.
Ok, I used the link provided above (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/) and it worked. I didn't do anything with the existing FireFox version already on my machine, but it didn't seem to interfere with this install. I tested the updated and old versions of the forms in different projects, and everything seems to open and function fine. Hallelujah!
This is a relief, as I have been battling with IE for two days now, especially when I tried to have more than one tab open at a time, and especially with the forms. If I have the credits page open in one tab, and try to open a form in a second tab, I had to leave my screen showing the form tab and not do any other tasks while it opened. If I just sat there waiting, it opened OK (though there were sometimes error messages while working within the form). If I clicked on anything else, or toggled between tabs while it was trying to open the form, it would come back with an error message and wouldn't open properly. Man, I hate IE.
For the Adobe DC issue, I have come across this before, too. I have to have the DC update for other programs and websites (I also use Acrobat Pro and the Adobe CS Suite), and sometimes that conflicted with the LEED requirements for the older version. I would sometimes have to upgrade, and sometimes downgrade. Not sure why everyone can't just be updated with the same version, but it's very frustrating.
For now, I'm just excited I can go back to using FireFox, for the time being, anyway. Thanks for your help, Michelle!
Emily - I'm glad that this helped!
I reached out again to USGBC Technology team about the DC issue because it affects me (and I'm sure other LEEDusers). I haven't heard back yet. I'm trying to get USGBC Technology to tell me if Acrobat Pro DC has the same problems as Adobe Reader DC as farFloor-area ratio is the density of nonresidential land use, exclusive of parking, measured as the total nonresidential building floor area divided by the total buildable land area available for nonresidential structures. For example, on a site with 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of buildable land area, an FAR of 1.0 would be 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of building floor area. On the same site, an FAR of 1.5 would be 15,000 square feet (1395 square meters), an FAR of 2.0 would be 20,000 square feet (1860 square meters), and an FAR of 0.5 would be 5,000 square feet (465 square meters). as blocked content.
I am curious if you have Adobe Reader 11 (XI) installed in addition Acrobat Pro DC. And if so, if it works ok. I hadn't noticed the incompatibility issue until you posted last week - mainly because the forms seemed to work ok in DC. (I upgraded Acrobat Pro X over the holidays.)
At the moment, it looks like I have the following:
- Acrobat XI Pro
- Acrobat Reader DC
- Adobe CS6 Suite
- Adobe CC 2017
I do recall having to install/uninstall between DC and Adobe Reader 11 in the past several time to get different applications to cooperate. I haven't had that happen in a few months, though. Could just be by coincidence.
Since updating as previously described, I have not had issues in the v3 projects with the forms. Interestingly enough, I just registered my first v4 project this week, and those forms have been finicky upon trying to open. Sometimes it's fine, and sometimes I get the version error message again. I can't figure out why, but am assuming it's still related to the Firefox vs Adobe issue again.
I have been attempting to access leedonline for the last 20 minutes and receive the following:
This page can’t be displayed
•Make sure the web address https://www.leedonline.com is correct.
•Look for the page with your search engine.
•Refresh the page in a few minutes.
All other websites work fine. I can't seem to find anything about maintenance this weekend. I've been accessing this website from this exact same computer for the past 6 months and in fact submitted for final construction review just a couple of days ago.
Help? Anyone else having issues?
Apparently leedonline.com is no longer the website address. Which you can't determine by searching online via Google or DuckDuckGo either. The only way I was able to figure it out, was to wade my way through the USGBC's horrid website. Clicking on their link at the bottom of the site, takes me to the new website address to allow one to sign in. Can't even tell you how thankful I am this will be the last project I ever document. This system is a complete waste of my clients funds.
For anyone else who runs in to this problem. The website address is now: https://lo.usgbc.org/
Caroline - I hear your pain. I think the URL you were using is the one for LEED Online v3 that is defunct as of the first of this year.
Note: When USGBC did scheduled maintenance on LEED Online on August 5-6, 2016, one of the updates made was to change the URL of the website; however, my saved favorite in Internet Explorer for this page (https://www.usgbc.org/leedonline/) redirected me (and continues to redirect me) to the new URL with no problem. The only way I noticed is that I had to enter a new password because there was not one saved for this new page.
I've been using that exact website address from sometime in 2010 until August 15th 2016 when I completed a final submission for another project I documented. When I attempted to log in on August 20th, no such link existed anymore. I don't recall seeing any e-mails. I'm not "steeped" in LEED so I easily miss a lot of changes (but I think that's true for a large portion of people that don't document as their daily job). This is a case where they really need a redirect with very a very clear notice.
FYI, I'm a LEED consultant who's in the website everyday including weekends. As of Sunday, I began getting the error and my browser was not redirecting. I wouldn't have known about the new URL without your post. So thanks!
Glad it was helpful Michelle!
Thanks! You are more knowledgeable than USGBC/GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). Customer service today. They just told me the website was down and had no estimate for when it would be back up!
Hah. Could access LEED Online page, and even my credit forms...just couldn't input data! Had my hopes up for a moment, then cruelly dashed...
Deborah, I hope you have better luck with that than I did. A number of months ago when I began the construction submittal phase, I had the exact same problem. I can't tell you how many times I contacted and spoke with GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC).. They had no idea what the problem was. It literally took MONTHS to be able to document because I couldn't get any of the forms to save any information or change anything to be able to start documenting again. My issue was the same as Ian's (see discussing below). Mine all of the sudden started working again (thank goodness), no idea why. Try Ian's solution below. Maybe it will work for you.
I managed to upload and save stuff as late as Friday last week, so will hold off changing my Adobe Reader. Hate to think how that will affect my other workflows. Taking a wait-and-see attitude....
I can see enter the Construction Review forms and type-in words but I am unable save the changes or to upload files in the forms even though we are the team manager & project manager .
Error messages include :
- « Form save issues detected with this browser. »
- « Proceed with caution! This form is linked to a credit that is currently under review or has already been reviewed. Any information linked to a credit under review is currently locked and will remain locked until the credit to which the information is linked is returned from review. Any information linked to a previously-reviewed credit will remain locked until the credit to which the information is linked is marked as "In Progress" » .
I have tired internet explorer V11, V10, V9 etc... and chrome with no luck. Did we miss or skip over something ? Can someone please help us out to diagnose the problem? Regards,
Ian - I have been getting new and frustrating messages from LEED Online since Sunday, July 31. Sorry to hear you are having troubles as well. I am not sure if there are some larger problems going on or what is exactly happening. FYI: This post on another forum noted that this team was having data disappear that was entered in LEED Online forms - http://www.leeduser.com/comment/redirect/65916.
I have not experienced the problem you are outlining above. Are you in the middle of a design review? I hope if other LEEDusers have ideas to help you they will chime in.
However, I would suggest using the Feedback button in the lower right hand corner LEED Online (if you haven't already) and try to get more targeted and prompt assistance directly from the USGBC Technology team. They are fairly responsive and can look directly at the specific issues in your project.
Ian - Cynthia Knight with USGBC posted this in response to the link I listed in my previous post - http://www.leeduser.com/comment/redirect/65950 - about unprecedented use of LEED Online.
And earlier today, I got the same "Form save issues detected with this browser" you mentioned when using IE 11 and was having a horrible time with pages loading. I shut down my computer and router and upon restart, things had corrected themselves but it could have been that folks on the east coast had gone home for the day and the unprecedented load was relieved.
Michelle - The Design Review is complete (one pending credit and design appeal review was "skipped). The construction stage is started (but the Construction Preliminary Review is not yet started).
I have used the Feedback button before posting on the LEED User Forum. I am still waiting for a response from USGBC.
I have tried multiple computers, with different internet connections and I still get the same error. So I do not think that it is a load or internet issue as I have tried early morning Paris time when the US is still sleeping.
After many tests and trials I discovered a / the solution that works; changing Adobe Reader versions from version "11.0" to version "2015.0" on my Windows 7 computer.
It was not a IE explorer versions (V9, V10 vs V11), language compatibility problems etc…
There may be other solutions out there but this one worked for me.
Ian - I really appreciate it when LEEDusers follow up and post outcomes and solutions to issues raised on the forums. While posting that additional information might not always be convenient or a priority, it helps the whole community. Thanks for letting us know and I am so glad you got it working again.
I had this exact same problem. It literally took months to be able to document again. Try explaining that to your client! Glad you were able to find a solution! Thank you for sharing with us what it was/is. The leedonline/USGBC folks were of absolutely zero help.
Other option .... USGBC sent me.
System Requirements / Settings document to view NEWLEED Adobe forms in Internet Explorer.
Step 1: Click on “Check System Requirements” available in LEED online login page.
Step 2: Verify that all system parameters status shows up as “GREEN”.
If system requirements shows up all in “GREEN” but still facing the issue please follow with below steps to repair “Adobe Reader”.
2. Adobe Reader Repair:
- Please find Step below to Repair “Adobe Reader”:
Step 1: Open up Adobe Reader from the Start menu and click help and repair as shown in the below screenshot (not shown).
Note: If you have an Adobe Acrobat, please Repair Acrobat, Open up Adobe
Acrobat from the Start menu and click help and repair Adobe Acrobat
Once above Acrobat / Adobe PDF reader is repaired verify that able to view the forms in LEED online else please continue with below IE settings:
3. Reset Internet Explorer:
- Please find Steps below to reset internet explorer:
Step 1: Open Internet explorer Tools Internet options and click on advanced tab.
Once Internet explorer is “Reset” make adobe reader as default to open PDF Files.
Step 2: Right click a PDF file and make sure Adobe Reader is selected as the default PDF viewer.
After reset of Internet explorer is completed please continue with below steps to enable/verify Adobe plugins in internet explorer.
4. IE Browser Settings – Enable Plug-Ins:
- Please find Step below to steps to “Enable Plugins” in internet explorer.
Step 1: Open internet explorer, and choose Tools -> Manage Add-ons
Step 2: Under Add-on Types, select Toolbars and Extensions.
Step 3: In the Show menu, select All “add-‐ ons”
Step 4: In the list of add-ons, select Adobe PDF Reader.
Note: If you do not see the Adobe PDF Reader add-on, try the other options on
the menu. For example, on some systems, the add-on appears when you select
Run without Permission.
Step 5: Click the Enable or Disable button (it toggles depending on the status of the selected add-on):
Enable sets the Adobe PDF Reader add-on to open PDFs in the browser.
Disable turns off the add-on so it does not open PDFs in the browser.
Select enable if the status of the Adobe reader is disabled.
Ian - thanks so much for your post. I have been getting the form error message and could not figure out what was wrong. Checked my system requirements, updated Adobe and success! Thanks for saving me many hours of frustration. Truly appreciate the info and help.
Ok, I've discovered a new problem...
I've had several projects go through GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). reviews and receive comments back since this form update happened. For several credits/prereqs, the comments coming back are requiring items that are used in the new forms, but not the ones that are actually on the website. These projects I'm referring to were already registered before the form updates, and already had the credits attempted; they, therefore, have the previous versions of the forms in use, NOT the updated ones.
One example is for the water use reduction prereq/credit. The forms were filled out correctly, in the same manner that they always have been. The comment returned states:
"The floor plans in PIf4: Schedule and Overview Documents indicate that the project includes two unisex restrooms that do not contain urinals. The calculations in the form automatically assume that 100% of male occupants will use restrooms that contain urinals. If a percentage of male occupants will not have access to or will not be expected to use restrooms with urinals, the default Total Daily Uses for water closets and urinals must be adjusted in the form accordingly. Provide a narrative and supporting daily use calculations to explain the anticipated urinal usage. Revise the form to ensure that the Total Daily Uses column for the water closets and urinals has been modified appropriately."
We've never received this comment in other reviews before, but have received it at least twice just in the last two months. I know the new version of the form has the offline calculator that you must fill out (rather than directly on the form, like before), and that calculator has a designated line item that directly calculates specific urinal use for the males. Before this newest version, however, it was not called out or calculated in this manner. Yes, we previously (and still) have a line item in the flush fixture table for urinals, and it is linked appropriately to the user groups with the male/female ratios. But we did not previously get this review comment in any of my projects before, and have been documenting these items in the same, reliable fashion for years.
Are the reviewers now knowingly requiring documentation after the fact that the teams don't even know exist for projects that do not have the updated forms?
The example you use with WEp1 doesn’t sound like an issue that is directly tied to the new forms, in my opinion. That sounds like a pretty standard review comment that is used in the case of miscalculated Fixture User Groups to account for unisex restrooms, which is a common issue for a lot of project teams. Some may even ignore it entirely if they don’t understand that WEp1 is all about flow rates/occupancy use. Without seeing the form, or knowing how you’ve calculated/explained these in the past, one of two things:
1. If you’re sure you’ve accounted for unisex restroom use correctly, this may just be a simple oversight on the reviewer’s end that can be explained in a supplemental narrative. Buildings are complex, and reviewing a new project after reviewing multiple different projects (without being on the project team for months) can lead to errors, especially if it is not explicitly addressed up front or if you have a complex occupancy with levels of controlled access that you are trying to address. Email GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). if you aren’t sure…there’s confusion somewhere. How did the last project turn out that had this same comment?
2. You have not properly allocated a number of FTE/Transients in your Fixture User Group(s) that have access to the unisex restrooms, and/or you have not clearly explained your calculation methodology in a narrative. Perhaps the methodology you are using in this case is not acceptable. Really take a high-level look into the calculation trail for those specific restrooms and how someone who has not been on the project team would view it. In the old form, I would create a dedicated Fixture User Group for occupants using unisex restrooms that would separate out a portion of FTE/Transient occupants that had access to those unisex restrooms. The Gender Ratio of the Unisex fixture group would be changed to 100% female to easily calculate the Total Daily Uses that would result from men using a restroom without a urinal. There are other ways to do this, and if you haven’t already, take a look in the WEp1 forum for “unisex”.
At first glance, the v06.0 form and “2009_Water Use Reduction Calculator_v06.6” seem to add tools to make that calculation easier and much more visible (by allowing you to set your urinal use/unisex % in one fill-in cell). It also gives you an easy way to account for multiple fixtures available to a Fixture Use Group with different GPF/GPM rates. It doesn’t seem like there are new requirements in the new WEp1 form that would trigger this comment.
Thanks, Jerrod. I agree with your assessments, and we will likely end up doing something very similar to #2. I already have the team checking on the few unisex restrooms they have. We feel the male users in that area still have access to other restrooms that have urinals, and will not be using the unisex ones exclusively, but they're confirming with the owner.
The quote from my comment above was from WE Pre 1, but there was also an additional comment with WE Cr 3, which I thought was unusual. Usually, the credit feedback just ties it to the prereq and asks that you address the comments there. The accompanying comment asks us to "Provide the Water Use Reduction Calculator for fixtures and fittings" but does not give the team any indication of what this item is, or where to find it.
I know from having already used the newer form versions where the Calculator is stashed, but if I weren't part of the team, it would be a confusing comment. Additionally, is this not a duplication of effort for what they've already filled in on the template, itself?
Yeah, doubling up on the issue in the review comment for WEc3 is not standard. On the other hand, having a supplemental calculator outside of the form is a major departure from the way this has been applied and included in previous versions of the form for v2009 projects…they may see that as something that needs to be relearned, and reinforced with comments in both locations to ensure no one will miss that calculator upload. My guess is that they haven’t adjusted quality control for comments related to the v06 forms and to account for those that are using the new forms and those who are not.
Good luck with your narrative/calculation.
Jarrod - Thanks for sharing your experience with Emily on the unisex restroom calculations. That scenario has never been straightforward to document and it would be great if the Water Use Reduction Additional Guidance document had more detail than just the first footnote on page 2 about modifying the usage rates.
Emily - I attempted to ask a question about v06 forms and the impact on reviewers on last week's LEED v4 documentation tips webinar. I lost audio during the webinar right when they were answering my question and the video version they posted the web is the one held at 10 pm, which I did not attend (http://www.usgbc.org/education/sessions/leed-v4-education-series/documen...).
Emily - hopefully you have resolved this satisfactorily by now, but just in case... I run into the urinal issue frequently. I generally find the Online Form entirely inadequate for calculating meaningful usage, and have created my own spreadsheet that works well for me. I will usually upload a pdf of this spreadsheet as backup. If it gets really complicated, I also supply a narrative of my assumptions and calculations. Below is an excerpt from a recent project (large university building with classrooms and offices; "transients" in this case are the students) -- this methodology was approved (the tables do not past very well here, but you get the idea):
"Urinals are provided on some floors, but not on others. All but five floors in the building have urinals, and the vast majority of male occupants have access to urinals. To be conservative, water use calculations were weighted based on expected occupants per floor. Occupants were assumed most likely to use the restrooms on the floor they occupy.
Transient occupants will migrate through the building throughout their time in the building, as opposed to the full-time occupants who will spend the majority of their time in their office or other assigned space. Therefore, the “potential” transient population was determined for each floor by counting the total seats used primarily by transients on that floor (i.e., seats not assigned to full-time occupants, such as classroom seating). Because there are a greater number of seats than there will ever be transients in the building at a given time, this “potential” population was then converted to a percent of the total daily transients expected in the building. The actual transients expected per floor were determined by multiplying the (potential) percent per floor by the actual expected transients for the building. Transients on floors with urinals and transients on floors without urinals were summed for the respective User Groups. For example:
Total “Potential” Transient seats in Building 2,369
Total “Expected” Transients in Building 871
3rd Floor “Potential” Transient Seats 284
% 3rd Floor Transient Seats in Building 12%
% 3rd Floor Expected Daily Transients 104
A detailed table with information for each floor has been uploaded to the site. Full-time occupants were assumed to use the facilities located on the same floor as their office (or other point of full-time occupancy). Full-time and transient occupants on floors with and without urinals were summed for the respective user groups.
The following “Expected” Occupancies were determined:
Total Population On Floors w/ Urinal On Floors w/out Urinal
FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. 341 294 47
Transients 871 837 34
Total 1,212 1,130 82
Instead of using a separate spreadsheet, can you enter each floor as a separate fixture group in the standard LEED spreadsheet, and assign FTEs & Transients to each fixture group as you've described above? A narrative justifying the distribution of FTEs and transients would still be required, but maybe this would make the calcs more standardized (and easier for reviewer to approve) (?)
Hi Lyle - that certainly sounds like a viable option. This particular building was 18 stories, so that would have been a LOT of fixture groups, but on a smaller building I will definitely look into doing it that way. Thanks for the suggestion!
Holy moly. Thanks for the feedback. We have several projects in the midst of doing these calcs with and without unisex bathrooms, and will take these suggestions into consideration. I'll let you know if we figure out anything additional along the way. Thanks, everyone!
Thanks for all the awesome insights into the new platform. Very helpful. But I am very confused about the v06 forms. I see that new version in my LEED 2009 project with EQcr4.1 not requiring any uploads. But in my LEED v4 project, the low emitting form is a V01 from 2012 and requires 100% backup. This is true of the MR credit form also. I don't see anything in sample forms more recent.
So why would the v4 forms go from 20% backup to 100% backup while the new streamlined to match v4 LEED 2009 forms go from 20% backup to 0 backup?
Michelle - Thanks for your thoughts. Unfortunately I don't have an answer to your question but I did e-mail USGBC to ask if they could help with more detail on the differences between documentation requirements with LEED v4. (I was rather shocked to see all documentation backup removed for the v2009 MR material attribute and EQ low-emitting materials credits.) If USGBC doesn't post directly, as soon as I hear back, I'll post a response.
Also, this might be something to ask on July 20th's webinar Documentation tips for LEED v4 project teams.
Thanks, Michelle. I guess I should just be scurrying to swap out v06 forms on my dozens of existing 2009 projects so that I can save myself the backup requirement, but like you I'm kind of shocked. I'll look for the follow up.
I haven't heard back from request to USGBC for a response to your post.
I wonder if posting a comment to the official USGBC article - http://www.usgbc.org/articles/new-forms-online-leed-2009-and-leed-v4-pro... - about these changes might get a more prompt answer?
Thanks, I have done so. If I get a response, I'll post it here.
Michelle - I wanted to reference your dialogue via the comments section of the article New Forms Online for LEED 2009 and LEED v4 Projects - http://www.usgbc.org/articles/new-forms-online-leed-2009-and-leed-v4-pro... - so other LEEDusers have access to that information. Peggy Brock LEED Specialist at USGBC wrote to you: "The article is correct in general that the overall amount of documentation has been reduced but the MR and EQ uploads have not. Batya will edit her article to clarify that. For these specific EQ and MR uploads have not been reduced in v4. It makes sense to remove the cutsheets for LEED 2009 because we have confidence project teams understand the requirements and are selecting appropriate products."
You replied: "I just want to note that reducing overall documentation in v4 is not the same as reducing uploaded backup in LEED 2009. We are in the midst of v4 projects now and the documentation required has if anything increased overall. The forms may appear streamlined but the calculators, reports, maps, etc. needed to substantiate the credit are more intensive than before with just about every credit, not including the 100% backup for EQ and MR credits. There's a lot more time and effort involved as perhaps befits v4's rigor. But it should be acknowledged."
LEEDuser has posted an update to the article on this forum (see June 2016 update above) to reflect communications with USGBC and in response to USGBC's article on the changes to LEED Online (http://www.usgbc.org/articles/new-forms-online-leed-2009-and-leed-v4-pro...).
thanks for posting this, Michelle. I'd like to learn more about the offline mode. It sounds like only one person can "check out" a credit form at any given time. That makes sense, but what happens if someone checks out the form and never checks it back in (or loses it/forgets/leaves the project...)? This seems like a big vulnerability to me, and another big reason for enabling Exclusive Access.
With all these changes to LOL, why hasn't the biggest problem been fixed - the site is WAY to slow to help bring project costs down? I spend hours simply waiting for pages to load on LOL.
Lyle - Unfortunately I don't have answers to your questions but I did e-mail USGBC to ask if they could help with more detail on offline mode. Also, I am sure they will want to know that you are having trouble with LEED Online's slowness. If USGBC doesn't post directly, as soon as I hear back, I'll post a response.
Thank you, Michelle. LEED Online slowness is something that I thought was a shared experience. Is it not slow for you? If that is the case, please let me know what browser you are using. I use IE11, but have always found the site very slow and have heard others complain about it. Am I missing a trick?
Lyle - I too use Internet Explorer 11. Maybe it's an expectation compared to other sites or an Internet connection issue? Or maybe since I'm still working in LOv2, which is really slow, the current LEED Online seems zippy?
The only trick I can share is that I keep multiple tabs open in IE 11 so that while a form is loading in one tab, I can be doing something else at the same time.
Yes, the multiple tab trick definitely helps a lot, but sometimes makes me nervous that I missed something in all the tab juggling. I've heard that credit form uploading & opening speed is one of the main benefits of Tracker Plus (something about how their cacheing is setup). I'm considering using the offline option on my newest project to avoid the issue.
Hope you're doing well, by the way! Haven't said hi in a while...
I have used IE, Chrome (until last Sept when they stopped supporting the plugin), and now use FireFox for my LEEDOnline work. I've sat in countless locations, on different computers, on and off networks, etc. Both the v2 and v3 websites have always been painfully slow. Every time I introduce a new team member or client to the website, I have to explain that it is always slow, and it's not their connection or computer.
Since the v3 website launched many years ago, I've noticed that the website will slow down considerably, and often even stop working entirely when users across all the time zones are accessing it. It's best in the morning on the east coast, and best in the afternoon on the west. I have sent emails to GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)./USGBC on this before, and all they do is ask for screenshots and such showing the issue. Problem is, you can't screenshot slowness.
I use these websites daily, and have for a good 7 years now. I have found no tricks or work-arounds. We shouldn't have to be 'in the know' and try and cheat a system all the time just to get it to work properly.
The website(s) functionality has always been a serious pain and productivity killer for users on our projects.
The only solution we have found is to work on Saturday and Sunday. The speed of uploading materials is astonishing compared with during week days. We also have noticed somewhat of a difference after 5 p.m. Eastern time when everyone seems to have gone home.
Working in Alaska time zone, I feel much better now. Most of my LOL time is after 5pm Eastern. My condolences to East Coast APs...
I believe that LEED Online functionality is one of the biggest opportunities for bringing LEED-related project costs down.
I agree with Lyle. It's a tough situation having to explain why some simple documentation takes multiple hours b/c you have to factor in the website functionality issues. It is a real problem for us, but we cannot expect employees, subs, contractors, etc. to end up pinned to their computers on their own time trying to make up the difference.
I haven't heard back from request to USGBC for a response to Lyle's 6/30/16 post. (Hi Lyle!!)
As you know, LEEDusers had reported issues with new LEED-2009 Materials and Resources Calculator (v06) almost immediately after USGBC issued it in January 2016. There have been several posts on the 2009 NC and CI forums (http://www.leeduser.com/comment/redirect/62905) .
On April 8, 2016, USGBC issued a revised version of the Materials and Resources Calculator (v07). For now, at least, we can download this spreadsheet from http://www.usgbc.org/resources/materials-and-resources-calculator-v2009. There appear to have been some modifications, but I suspect that v07 does not resolve all the issues that were raised concerning v06.
I hope that USGBC will address the 2009 MR Calculator when they release their article clarifying the recent updates to LEED Online forms and calculators.
Hi Jon - Yes - The MR Calculator was an issue I brought up to USGBC when I conferenced with staff in late April. I've been exchanging e-mails with USGBC on issues with the new MR calculator since January when your forums began getting posts about problems.
I was surprised to learn that they had released multiple versions of the v06 calculator and then finally released a v07 one. (See more on this notice issue below in the last paragraph.) Despite these updates, I didn't post this information because when I looked at the v07 calculator the original issue that I heard about (i.e., no way to record MRc5 distances for BD+C) was still not fixed. My contact was going to follow up on the outstanding issues.
One thing I did learn was that it was intentional that all required backup was removed from the calculator. This was part of the overall attempt to simplify documentation requirements. (This is part of the draft USGBC article that I was able to preview. However, one of my requested edits to the article was that I thought it would be worthwhile that they include information on the new calculators that accompany many of the v06 forms. This would dovetail with explanation about the move they made to allow for offline functionality. We’ll see if that gets included.)
One of my follow up points to USGBC staff is that I don’t think it’s fair to make LEED practitioners be their beta testers. In addition, unless USGBC notices that these changes are made, we users do not know. Their process is not to change a form version unless there are substantial changes to the form. The “non-substantive” changes were just noted on the calculator page’s description section (See list of updates on this page as an example - http://www.usgbc.org/resources/materials-and-resources-calculator-v2009). A great outcome to these concerns is that moving forward they do intend to publish all calculator changes (substantive and non-substantive) in the Addenda Database - http://www.usgbc.org/leed-interpretations. To find these, chose Form Update as the Entry Type in the filters. I know this doesn't address all your forums' concerns but it's a start...
Jon - I posted a similar comment on some of your MR forums in order to help get the word out.
I was asked to review the latest Materials and Resources Calculator v08. It should be released with (or before) the 1/1/2017 quarterly LEED Addenda Update. It will be cataloged as a Form Update (under Entry Type) in the Addenda Database - http://www.usgbc.org/leed-interpretations.
Keep an eye on http://www.usgbc.org/resources/materials-and-resources-calculator-v2009 for the new version.
It addresses the concerns raised about how to enter regional materials by the embedded comment in cell T7, which USGBC updated to note that for BD+C only the furthest of the compliant manufacturing/extraction distances is to be entered. USGBC also added a similar note for Option 2 in ID+C.
At least this method of entering the furthest compliant distance can be used and you’ll be on the same page when the updated version is released.
The new v08 calculator has been posted - http://www.usgbc.org/resources/materials-and-resources-calculator-v2009.
USGBC will announce this with the January 2017 addenda but I wanted to pass along the news. Happy Holidays!
Thanks for posting this, Michelle, and Happy New Year!
Well, yes, the Credit Category is still there, as are IDc1.1, 1.2, etc. But the ability to change the name to a specific credit has disappeared. How in the world am I supposed to remember what IDc1.2 is?!!!
I second this one, too, and also noticed that aspect since my previous postings.
Deborah and Emily - There's definitely a glitch here. Did you put this concern in as Feedback? If not, please do. USGBC IT needs to hear from us.
I tested a v06 ID form for a LEED-CI project for all three ID scenarios (Innovation in Design, 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., and Pilot Credit).
1. For Innovation in Design: When I typed in “Credit Name Test” in the "Credit name as it should appear on scorecard" field and saved the form, this name appears on the Credits tab.
2. For Exemplary Performance: Here's the glitch and the workaround. When I typed a name into the "Credit selected for exemplary performance" field and saved the form (even after deleting the data in the Innovation in Design field above) LEED Online still displays the previous "Credit Name Test" on the Credits tab. (Definite glitch that it remembers this entry even after it is deleted from the form.) So, as a workaround for now, it appears you can name your Exemplary Performance credits by typing a name into the Innovation in Design option as noted above. That name will appear in the Credits tab even if you have selected Exemplary Performance option.
3. For Pilot Credits: Similar to Innovation in Design, when I typed “Pilot Credit Test” in the “Pilot credit name as it should appear on scorecard” field and saved the form (after deleting all other test data previously entered on the form), this name appears in the Credits tab.
Hope this helps for now. I put in a Feedback ticket referencing this forum.
Thanks Michelle - tried it and it WORKS!
Now how about a LEED Online hack page?
I am glad this worked for you. As I noted today below under the original post "lots and lots of comments...!),USGBC will be publishing an article on the changes with LEED Online related to the v06 forms.
But rest assured that the feedback we provide is essential and the ticket associated with this ID glitch has been updated and is in their queue.
You guys might find this funny...I sent Feedback to LEEDOnline about Michelle's workaround, and was told NOT to do that. Might confuse the LEED Reviewer.
Deborah - One of my contacts at USGBC told me that the Technology Department is going to address this glitch. They hope to get it fixed this week.
A sort of update on this...I have a project that was registered after all this initial hub-bub, so it automatically has all of the new versions of the forms. I have an EP point for water use reduction that I want to claim and label so that it shows up on the credits page. There is no option to allocate the point under the WE prereq or credit, nor does the ID form give me an option for that credit in the pull-down. It does allow me to type in the name of the credit, but that name does not show up on the Credits page.
I know they removed the functionality of connecting the templates (still a huge inconvenience for many many reasons, but I digress), so have we concluded that there is no way to get the Credits page to show an actual specific label for each of the ID credits?
Hi Emily - Despite assurances I received last May and again in December, the last I checked this (2/9/17) it still had not been fixed; however, the workaround that I outlined on April 27, 2016 above (typing in the name in the Innovation in Design field) still works.
I plan to follow up on this as part of my review of the April 2017 Quarterly Addenda. I'll let you know what I hear.
Emily - I got word last week that USGBC Technology is fast-tracking this fix. Apparently there was a misunderstanding of what the issue was. Stay tuned for an update.
FYI: USGBC is schedule to release the April Quarterly Update for Addenda tomorrow. My summary should be posted by the end of next week here - http://www.leeduser.com/strategy/essential-leed-interpretations-addenda-....
...but I'll start with these two:
1) In the updated forms, they've removed the "Uploads" button that used to be right next to where they required that you provide whatever applicable uploads to the credit you were working on. Now, the form still tells you to provide these uploads, but there is no obvious link as to where they should go. Those of us who regularly use the website know that you can go back to the credit form, under the credit you are working on, and click the Uploads button there, which will take you to where all related uploads should go. If you are new to LEEDOnline (or just not as computer/website savvy), you're left staring at the form trying to figure out where to put your documents. Additionally, having to go back outside of the form forces two additional 'clicks' for navigation. I'm sure we all know how painfully slow LEEDOnline can be, especially during the main day hours when all time zones are working, so any additional navigation adds a significant amount of downtime for frequent users, such as myself.
I left feedback on this issue, and actually got a quick response from GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)., as follows: "We would like to inform you that, as per customer's feedback have removed linkages between forms, upload buttons in the forms and have generic upload in the upload page. Customers can fill out entire credit form and then go to uploads section to upload all the files at one place and at a time. Which will reduce the time navigating between upload tab and forms tab. It is simpler and quicker for customers to work."
Do they not realize that much of the time, it is not one individual filling out the entire form at once, and uploading all items at once? Also, if we're QC'ing completed items, we can no longer toggle between the form and the uploads to review sections. A separate problem with the QC portion is that, for the downloads, you must individually click on, open/save each file in order to view it, which is additionally tons of processing time. Separate issue, though.
2) The updated forms that I have come across so farFloor-area ratio is the density of nonresidential land use, exclusive of parking, measured as the total nonresidential building floor area divided by the total buildable land area available for nonresidential structures. For example, on a site with 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of buildable land area, an FAR of 1.0 would be 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of building floor area. On the same site, an FAR of 1.5 would be 15,000 square feet (1395 square meters), an FAR of 2.0 would be 20,000 square feet (1860 square meters), and an FAR of 0.5 would be 5,000 square feet (465 square meters). for my v3 projects are no longer linked to the PI Forms. This was one function that I loved in the update between v2.2 and 3 websites. It eliminating tons of problems with continuity of information reported, especially in regards to occupancy, space types, and SF takeoffs for the building and site. Why would they remove that function?!
I'm hoping this is a temporary glitch that will be remedied soon. I also gave feedback on this issue, but have yet to receive a response.
Ok, that's all my venting for the moment. Argh.
I have spent more time on the phone with GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). and using the feedback button today than getting actual work done.
Emily and Allen - I have reached out to USGBC to see if I can communicate with someone about the issues you've raised. Hang in there!
I got a very helpful response about the lack of linked fields from the PI Forms to others:
" We don’t have linked functionality in V06 Version.
Please let us know if you have further questions or feedback."
I really just don't understand why this function would be removed. They're just creating way too many opportunities for mistakes amongst team members, with everyone coming in with potentially different SF takeoffs, occupancy info, etc.
Thanks to Emily's detailed comments and concerns, I have had two meetings with USGBC and GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). staff including the Technology Department regarding the changes with the v06 forms. USGBC will be issuing an article next week on what has changed in the LEED Online working experience with the v06 forms.
Experienced users who were familiar with the pre-v06 forms and the way LEED Online worked with them (linkages, upload buttons on forms, etc.) will need to evolve to the new streamlined v06 forms, the change to uploads, and the offline calculators.
I admit it is a lot to digest and adapt to. I will post an update to the article in this forum to summarize and reference the USGBC article.
My contact at USGBC tells me she has still not been able to get the article on the v06 forms approved for publication. So, I still can't update my article for this forum.
As soon as I hear more, I'll let you know.
This is all great, and much better than not hearing anything from them. Thanks for your followup work.
This may already exist, but is there a way for them to set up some sort of response committee for mass changes like these where power users could provide feedback/reactions before things are implemented? It sounds like they're taking their online feedback and running with it in a lot of cases. I'm part of a very large firm that manages 100s of LEED projects, and it seems like other individuals with similar setups could provide some valuable insight for them.
Ok, one more thing I've noticed...
In the uploads section for each credit, it no longer tells you what the required upload is. Since their previous response indicates that they removed the upload button on the template so that we could upload all items at once to save time, do they expect the users to keep their own list of what each credit requires for each upload?
Under each credit, it now just says "Provide all required uploads listed in the form. Please ensure that filenames are accurate and descriptive."
This just seems like pure laziness on their part, and will require additional time and cause confusion for non-regular users who are not familiar enough with each credit to just 'know' what should be uploaded.
I agree the lack of connectivity between forms isn't ideal, but I believe it was removed because it increased the complexity of the forms (making it hard to ensure that they all operate perfectly) and it slowed down the system.
Regarding the list of uploads, the way I get around this is by having the form and uploads page open in separate browser tabs, so you can refer back to the form while uploading. Multiple tabs is a huge improvement in this version of LEED Online, compared to the first v3 LEED Online.
Christopher has shared some of the insight that everyone can gain once USGBC posts the article on the new forms for LEED 2009 projects this week.
Also, USGBC is working on text to add to LEED Online to alert people of the changes and address how to handle uploads. They will also provide a link to the new article.
Thanks for the insight and tips! I agree multiple tabs is a great improvement.
I'm waiting for LEEDuser to post my summary of USGBC's article to the forum article above. In the meantime, here is the USGBC article in case you missed it - http://www.usgbc.org/articles/new-forms-online-leed-2009-and-leed-v4-pro....
LEED AP® BD+C, ID+C, O+M, Managing Principal
Earthly Ideas LLC, a LEED® Proven Provider™
Copyright 2017 – BuildingGreen, Inc.