It may be green, but a boat can't be certified under LEED 2009's new Minimum Program Requirements. Solar Sailor
Understanding the MPRs
In addition to the familiar prerequisites and credits, LEED 2009 has introduced a new element: Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs). The MPRs didn’t make it into the 2009 editions of the Reference Guides, so to see them you’ll have to download the actual rating system documents from the LEED Resources and Tools page of the USGBC website, or register a project in LEED Online. The MPRs fall under seven headings that are the same for each of the five initial LEED 2009 rating systems, but the details vary slightly for each system. A “Supplemental Guidance” document that outlines exceptions and clarifies these requirements is also available on the same page.
Boats need not apply
USGBC introduced MPRs primarily to filter out projects that are not a good fit for the LEED certification process because they are simply too wacky. Some of them illustrate just how far some people have gone in trying to apply LEED in unconventional ways. MPR #2, for example, says that the project “must be a building” and it must have a fixed location—boats and airplanes need not apply.
Access to energy data
For a normal building on a typical site, the main thing to worry about with the MPRs is the energy reporting requirement. All registered projects must now allow USGBC access to whole-building energy and water usage data for five years from the date of certification, according to MPR #6. Make sure the building owner is aware of and on board with that commitment.
LEED’s new Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs)
Here are the key points of each MPR. Note that these are only paraphrased summaries, you must go to the rating systems for the actual language!
1. Must Comply with Environmental Laws
This applies to all work on the project during design and construction, and to the resulting project, including anything within the project’s site boundary.
2. Must be a Building
Specifics here differ by rating system, but, essentially, the project has to include or be within a fixed building (no tents) and it has to be on pre-existing land. Also, except for CI projects, only whole buildings count, so additions can no longer be certified apart from the building to which they're attached (at least not without a special-case exemption).
3. Must Use a Reasonable Site Boundary
In a nutshell, no gerrymandering the project site.
4. Can't Be Too Small
The project has to enclose at least 1,000 ft2 of space (250 ft2 for CI projects).
5. Must Comply with Minimum Occupancy Rates
If it doesn’t have at least one full-time equivalentFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 40 hours per week in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per week divided by 40. Multiple shifts are included or excluded depending on the intent and requirements of the credit. occupant it can still apply, but can’t achieve any IEQ credits.
For EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. projects there is an additional requirement: the building has to be occupied "at typical physical occupancy" for at least a year before applying for certification. The minimum occupancy for "typical physical occupancy" levels had been defined as 75% in EBOM 2008, but a September 2, 2009 ruling has changed that to 50%, recognizing that current market conditions are making the 75% threshold challenging. This change does not apply to hotels, which have to meet the same 55% occupancy threshold as they did before. (See the Resources tab for a document that provides details on this ruling.)
6. Must Allow USGBC Access to Whole-Building Energy and Water Usage Data
Stay tuned! USGBC is still working out exactly how this requirement will be implemented. Initial language stated that it remains in effect even if the building changes ownership, so it will affect real-estate transactions for up to 5 years.
7. Must Comply with a Minimum Building Area to Site Area Ratio
Small buildings on big sites won’t be accepted. The project site boundary has to be defined so that gross floor area is at least 2% of site area.
The Cost of LEED Certification
56 Comments
Performance data and decertification
BuildingGreen.com has a great summary of the unfolding debate on the energy data requirements and the looming threat of LEED "decertification" here:
http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/2009/7/14/All-LEED-Project...
Multiple building certification
On the MPR summary box accessible on the homepage, the follow is stated under #2 Must be a building.
"...and that a group of buildings underway as part of a single construction contract have to submit as a single project."
I have not seen this explicitly stated by USGBC, is this still correct? Anyone have substantiation for this? Thanks!
Nadav Malin replied President, BuildingGreen, LLC Aug 15 2009
Thanks for catching that, April! You're right, that is not part of the requirements. (It was included in a previous version of the MPRs).
MPR's - as LEED prerequisite - your opinion
Dear All,
I feel the minimum program requirements should be made as pre-requisite since it partly governs a projects LEED Certification.
"The Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) reserves the right to revoke LEED certification from any LEED 2009 project upon gaining knowledge of non-compliance with any applicable MPRs. If such a circumstance occurs, no registration or certification fees paid to GBCI will be refunded."
Your opinions please...
right to revoke LEED certification
Seems like a notice of warning and a reasonable time frame for correcting of deficiencies would be appropriate before decertification is invoked.
Minimum Occupancy Requirement for EBOM has changed
On Sept 2 USGBC released a ruling changing the minimum occupany rate for certification from 75% to 50%, citing "market conditions" (though it also says the change is like to be permanent--does that mean the market will stay down forever?).
The MPR #5 summary here has been edited to reflect this change, with a link to the announcement.
MPR's for Building Addition Projects
The MPR's for BD&C projects states that "LEED projects must include the new, ground-up design and construction, or major renovation, of at least one building IN ITS ENTIRETY." This would lead projects to assume that building additions that excluded the existing building component from their scope of work (therefore not the entire building) would not be eligible for certification.
After speaking with GBCI, they informed me that the basic rule of thumb is that building additions do not qualify. However, they will accept building additions on a case by case basis. For example, if the existing building was previously certified or if the addition is on a completely separate mechanical system, they will consider accepting. In order to request an exemption be made, go to www.gbci.org/contact us/project certification questions and email them regarding the specific project conditions and request exemption from the Minimum Program Requirements (MPR).
Minimum Building Area to Site Area Ratio ?
Why a Minimum Building Area to Site Area Ratio ?
What happens if you have a visitor centre in a national park ?
Your opinions please ...
Nadav Malin replied President, BuildingGreen, LLC Dec 11 2009
This is not any kind of official response, of course, but from conversations I heard during the evolution of these MPRs, here's the logic:
A small certified building on a large tract of land might represent a green building, but could involve little or no greening of the rest of the property. So it would be misleading if, for example, a golf course claimed LEED status for the entire property after building a LEED clubhouse.
There is an easy solution to this, which is to define a "site boundary" for the project that just includes area immediately around the building. That allows your visitor to become certified, without suggesting that the certification applies to the entire park.
For landscape-only projects (the golf course, or the rest of the national park) there is the emerging Sustainable Sites Initiative, which USGBC has indicated it will endorse once it becomes official. http://www.sustainablesites.org/
Dealing with concurrent LEED certifications on one site
I am working on a medical campus project on which the team felt during the design development phase that it was justified to pursue 3 separate LEED 2009 certifications for a stand-alone adminstrative building (major renovation of a historic building), a new stand-alone research building (incorporating a partially preserved historic building), and a brand new medical center with various medical buildings and a CEP connected by a circulatory spine. Howeer, since schematic phase the whole campus was designed as an integrated site. Can we submit for the sustainable site credits for all three LEED certifications using documentation for one site, or we are better off creating artificial boundaries to split the site into 3 components driven by building locations? The later option will create challenges for us since we believe the whole campus as designed can satisfy most of the SS credits but when split we will not be able to meet some SS credit requirements within individual components.
Graciela Carrillo replied Feb 17 2010
I think you should specify a LEED boundary for each building and thus split the site into 3 areas. You may also check the LEED NC for multiple buildings, it may help you on which way to go. Although this document is meant to work with NC 2.2, it may clarify your options.
http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=1097
Hope this help.
Ruby Gao replied Jun 10 2010
I think you need re-define the site boundary for each building.
My experience is when I did OTIS project, two buildings of this project. At that time, I used a whole site, although USGBC accept this, it is stated in the final summary that re-define should be worked for such project.
Multiple buildings and site boundaries
I am working on certifying a office building for a waste management facility. There are several other structures used for sorting trash and recyclables on site. Am I able to define the "site boundary" such that it only includes this office building or is that considered gerrymandering?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Mar 02 2010
Rachael, if the project in question is really just focused on this one building (is it a renovation, or an O&M project?) then it's not gerrymandering to include that building in the LEED boundary.
This basically sounds like a "campus" situation and you have flexibility around this issue. USGBC has a guide for multiple building applications, by the way, but it hasn't yet been update for 2009.
Rachael McClain replied Mar 02 2010
Tristan, thanks for getting back to me. The project is certifying under O&M. This project is only focused on this one particular building, the office building, but there are other structures on the site. However, to meet the Building area to site area ratio of 2% the site boundary must be redrawn to meet the requirements. So some of the on site structures may be excluded by default. Should I look into the details on "campus" situations under the supplemental guidance for MPR's?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Mar 02 2010
Rachael, I guess I don't see what the problem is. If the project is focused on this one building—that's fine. If a sensible site boundary means you have to exclude other buildings (that you were maybe going to exclude anyway), also fine.
But I am a little confused—the intent behind that MPR requirement is to prevent LEED projects from benefiting unfairly in credit requirements by including a lot of open land around them. It seems counterintuitive that you would be forced to exclude buildings to meet the requirement.
Checking the MPR guidance is a good idea—there is a helpful note on campuses, though I'm not sure it directly addresses this question.
Who can be a required signatory?
Some of the submittal forms require the signature of a "required signatory". I says that they have to have some level of authority, but it does not say they have to be a licensed professional. Who can qualify to be a required signatory?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Mar 02 2010
Usually the LEED Online credit forms will indicate who is required for the "Required signatory." As an example, we have posted screen captures of IEQc6.2 here, with guidance on how to fill them out. There's a spot where the mechanical designer is required to initial.
Any particular credits, etc., you're wondering about?
Rachael McClain replied Mar 02 2010
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly, that clarifies things for me. I was wondering about the minimum program requirements PI Form1 page 2, but I see now it requires a signature from the owner. Thanks again for the clarification.
Andrea Anderson replied Mar 26 2010
Is there a list anywhere out there that shows which credits require owner or contractor signatories? I would like to be able to quickly give a list to either the owner or contractor so they know which ones they need to review. And it would be easier for me as the Project Manager to know which credits to give them access to, instead of opening them up one by one and looking through to see.
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Mar 26 2010
Yes, wouldn't that be nice? But there is no such list to my knowledge, and I double-checked with a USGBC contact as well. They did say they intend to develop it, but finalizing all the LEED Online forms is a higher priority.
Site boundary for new office in existing warehouse for LEED-CI
We are attempting LEED ID&C for an exisitng million+ SF cold dark shell industrial warehouse with a new 5481 SF office space. We are unclear whether to include the warehouse in the boundary as the improvements will include high-bay fluorescent lighting in the warehouse area, or if we should just define the boundary as the new office space. The warehouse would remain unconditioned, but the office would require HVAC and finishes. And if we exclude the warehouse shell, what of the site area? Can we include any/some of the site with the office boundary for SS credits? Any experience with this?
New office in existing warehouse for LEED-CI 2nd question
In addition to our boundary question, there is a question of occupancy. The way I read the LEED 2009 MPR Supplemental Guidance document, we cannot build this new office as a spec office and receive any IEQ points. Is there any consideration for spec spaces in LEED-CI? Excluding IEQ credits would be substantial.
David Posada replied Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Mar 09 2010
Sherri,
The MPR Supplemental Guidance language for section 5 includes the statement "Only occupant hours that the building intends and expects to accomodate under normal building operations shall be included in the annual 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. calculations." In the past we've used FTE numbers for future TI buildouts following the default occupant densities found in the appendix of the Core and Shell reference guide. Since actual occupancy numbers are only mentioned as an issue for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. projects, it would seem reasonable to use a default occupant density for a spec office such as 250 sf/ person, since that is the occupancy the building "intends and expects to accomodate".
Sherri Santellan replied Commerce Construction Co., L.P. Mar 09 2010
Thank you David. Your argument makes a world of sense to me.
A new office within an existing warehouse: use of CI /SS credits
This is in response to Sherri's March 5th posting. On page 10 of the MPR Supplemental Guidance, there is a section entitled 'Owner-occupied buildings and CI: certifying space not separate by ownership, management, lease, part wall, or floor' - it lists 5 criteria that must be met to certify something like the office that Sherri described. I'll speak specifically to the first criteria: 'a) It is unreasonable or impossible to draw a project boundary where there is separation by ownership, management, lease, or party wall separation. '. If you're renovating the office, but not renovating the warehouse square footage, than that would count as a good reason to draw the LEED project boundary between these two spaces. As for SS credits, yes, you can definitely include site area, just like you can for any other CI project. I hope this is helpful!
LEED NC?
We are looking at a new lab/ office building where only 3 or 4 out of 6 floors will have tenants in them. The remaining floors will most likely remain vacant for a couple of years. Is LEED NC possible for this lab/ office building? Or does each tenant need to get a separate certification under LEED CI?
David Posada replied Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Mar 31 2010
It's been common to have LEED NC projects with part of the building area only built out as core and shell for future TI's. In the past, NC was considered acceptable if the building was more than 50% occupied; it sounds like you may be on the edge of meeting the new 40%/60% rule:
"If a particular rating system is appropriate for 60% or more of a LEED project building or space, then that rating system should be used."
See the "LEED Rating System Selection Policy"
at http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6667 for those guidelines.
Future tenants are not necessarily required to pursue CI but it typical to have building standards, TI manuals, or green lease language that require compliance with VOC limits and other critical criteria.
"...one commercial, institutional, or high-rise residential..."
Why does USGBC insist that low-rise or mid-rise residential projects go through LEED for Homes? The LEED for Homes model is ideal for small projects where an architect may not be needed, where residential building code applies, and where individual blower door and duct tests make sense. Large mixed use projects are really commercial projects involving commercial developers, commercial contractors, and issues related to Core and Shell and Retail. How would one accommodate Core and Shell issues and Retail issues in LEED for Homes?
David Posada replied Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Apr 09 2010
Some mid rise-residential projects are able to follow NC - those with 4 habitable stories or higher. My understanding is a 2-3 story mixed use building such as one with ground floor retail and housing above would fall under NC as well.
Not sure of all the reasons for "why, in your question" but it's always been awkward applying several LEED credits to residential projects -
EQc1, EQc6.1, EAc5 aren't a great fit for hounsing;
We recently looked into pursuing LEED Homes for Mid-rise that's in Pilot and saw a number of advantages:
Working with a LEED Homes Provider instead of submitting credits to the LEED Certification Body may end up being a more "integrated designBuilding or interior design in which different components, such as the building envelope, window placement and glazings, mechanical systems, furniture, and surface finishes are considered as part of building design, especially to achieve goals related to sustainability." experience, since you meet directly with the party that essentially provides the review and can get questions answered early and quickly.
For some projects, there may be cost savings since energy modeling and commissioning functions are rolled into the LEED-H provider's scope. Some projects may still need to build an energy model, however. If units have their own independent HVAC system they can be modeled by the provider for a HERS rating, whereas units heated or cooled with central systems need to follow ASHRAE 90.1 modeling protocol which can require a specialty consultant.
Certification costs may end up being lower under LEED Homes compared to NC, since the documentation is less extensive - many items are reviewed by the Homes provider in person.
Under LEED Homes, blower door tests wouldn't normally be required for all units- a sampling of 20% is common. Even under NC, we've often had to do blower door tests on units to document IAQp2, Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control in a building where smoking is allowed in units.
We've heard that a mid-rise residential project with some ground floor retail may be able to exclude that area from the certification. LEED NC has allowed a similar path in high-rise residential projects when the retail was built out as core and shell and was less than 10% of the project area. The retail area could pursue LEED CI if desired.
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Apr 17 2010
Anthony, also note that there are some subtleties to LEED for Homes rating system selection contained in the USGBC's rating system selection policy.
To quote:
This rating system is appropriate for single family and low-rise (1-3 stories) multifamily
residential buildings that are undergoing new construction or a gut rehab
If they contain kitchens, dormitories and assisted living facilities may use LEED for Homes, at the project team’s discretion. If the kitchens are in-unit, as opposed to central, project teams
are strongly encouraged to use LEED for Homes.
.
Mid-rise (4-6 stories) multifamily residential buildings, dormitories, and assisted living facilities may use either LEED for Homes OR the LEED for Homes Mid-Rise Pilot Rating System (again, if kitchen facilities are present), which is a modified version of LEED for Homes.
MPR Documenting Compliance
Does it have to be the owner of the LEED project, or could it also be an owner representative who (with permission from the owner) completes the Project Information Form #1 in LEED Online V3? Could it be someone on the LEED Team (i.e. Project administrator) who checks all boxes including initialing it at end of form?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Apr 24 2010
I think it is normal for an owner's representative to initial for the "owner." In many cases the "owner" might be a corporation, etc., that would need an authorized representative to sign since there is no single person who could otherwise do it.
The owner (or rep) clearly needs to initial the form where it's indicated, not the project administrator. Technically LEED Online will probably never know or care who actually checked the boxes, since the owner is signing off on them.
MPR "Must be a building" applied to healthcare
It has come to my attention that the new definitions may exclude a great many healthcare projects, as they are rarely stand-alone buildings, but portions of existing healthcare campuses. I see that specific exemptions are apparently the viable track for getting around this - has anyone been successful in this? I'd love to hear some precedents.
Defining separate buildings
Margaret: Yes, there are definitely projects that have successfully used the exemptions to distinguish buildings that are horizontally attached. In the next week or so, we will be posting guidance on how to distinguish buildings that are vertically attached. if you're not sure if your project meets our guidelines, get in touch with customer service, and they should be able to help you out: http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact/Contact-Us/Project-Certification-Que...
Vertically attached building? MPR Guidance for you.
As Cara Mae forecasted above, USGBC just release Minimum Program Requirement guidance for distinguishing vertically attached LEED projects. As USGBC says, the document "Provides guidance for project teams pursuing LEED certification for structures that are vertically stacked but otherwise separate."
Vertically Attached Buildings MPR guidance
New vs Major Renovation for MPR 4
MPR 4 reads, "The LEED project must include a minimum of 1000 sf of gross floor area." I am working a an addition to an office building. The addition will be approximately 700sf, but the total area of the finished, renovated office will be about 2500 sf. My question is, does "gross area" refer to just the addition, or the entire building for a major renovation???? If we are reworking the MEP systems, I would think this would apply to the whole building, but for site issues, I would think only the addition matters. Thoughts?????
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC May 12 2010
Kurt, I think you're asking a good question but the answer is going to lead you somewhere you might not have expected.
I think you need to select a LEED rating system and apply it to the whole project, including the unrenovated space. If you review the MPR supplemental guidance (see link in Resources above), you'll see that certifying part of a building is not really allowed. This also takes care of your square footage issue.
And I think you'll find when you look into it (see the LEED rating system selection policy) that LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. is the appropriate rating system for this project, since it's greater than 60/40 renovation vs. addition.
Good news is, LEEDuser has a ton of great resources to guide this process!
Kurt Baumer replied May 12 2010
That makes sense. Now, if the entire building must be certified, what do I do about the 12,000sf shop attached to the rear? This is a prefab metal building, connected to the office by one door. The shop has no occupancy, and is separated from the office by a firewall. Will I be able to say the shop is a different building?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC May 12 2010
No occupancy, as in it's not used at all?
Again, read the MPR supplemental guidance, but I think you'll find you need to include it in the certification.
LEED 2009 NC or CI
We have a project we need to register as either NC or CI from what I can tell, but still a little confused which direction is best since the project is on the site of a previously Gold certified LEED project. The site is totally inside the boundry of the first LEED project, not just over lapping. So does that mean all my site credits will not count because they were achieved on the first certified project? Which is the best path to register?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Jul 24 2010
Paul, it is possible that the SS credits would not be available to this project. As far as which rating system is most appropriate and to be sure about this, I would need you to share a few more details on the project.
Ruby Gao replied Jul 27 2010
Paul, as my experience,
If your project is a part of previous LEED Certified building, then your project should go for LEED CI;
If your project is an isolated building within a previous LEED Site boundary, your project should go for LEED NC;
20 years of Energy and Water Use data?!
Did anyone else catch that the GBCI policy manual issued in April (available here: http://www.gbci.org/main-nav/building-certification/resources.aspx) states on the last page that buildings must agree to share energy and water use data for twenty years instead of five? Twenty seems a bit much- wonder which amount of time they will stick to?
Scott Dunning replied Jul 19 2010
I asked the same question back in March of this year and received an e-mail response from GBCI stating the project team will be required to provide the energy and water usage data for five years as stated in the Minimum Program Requirements, and that they were in the process of updating the Policy Manual.
Project Summary Details - exemptions?
Our LEED project is an expansion connected to an existing hospital facility. On the MPR p1 form 2, we entered 435k SF (new construction gross square footageSum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building including basements, mezzanine and intermediate-floored tiers, and penthouses with headroom height of 7.5 ft or greater. It is measured from the exterior faces of exterior walls or from the centerline of walls separating buildings, but excluding covered walkways, open roofed-over areas, porches and similar spaces, pipe trenches, exterior terraces or steps, chimneys, roof overhangs, and similar features.), 107k SF for renovated area (existing renovated gross square footage), and 442k SF (existing unrenovated gross square footage). I noticed that when I went to the Occupant and Usage Data MPR p1 form 3, the overall total square footage was automatically referenced in lieu of our project's new new construction SQFT. Will the "special circumstances" box need checked on the MPR p1 form 2, which will allow me to describe why our attached project is stand alone as defined by the MPR supplemental referencing horizontally attached buildings? (1. physically distinct, 2. Unique Address or Name)? Am I missing something? This question is similar to Margaret Montgomery's question submitted April 26th?
response to "Project Summary Details - exemptions?"
Hi Thomas -
If the existing square footage is not within the LEED project boundary - and it sounds like it isn't - than just don't include those numbers on the project information form. If the extension is considered a stand alone building, than there's no need for details about the existing building (at least in this context - it might be useful elsewhere in the application)
~Cara Mae
LEED Boundary: Multiple Buildings not all seeking certification
I am working on a Federal Project that has a primary building that is going for LEED certification, and an auxilary building that does not satisfy MPR #5, since it does not serve a Full-time EquivalentFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 40 hours per week in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per week divided by 40. Multiple shifts are included or excluded depending on the intent and requirements of the credit. occupant. The buildings will be built together under one contract. Does the LEED Boundary have to include both, and if so will the second building have an effect on the LEED certfication of the other building (especially energy calcs, materials, commissioning). If it is included how is it regarded in the site development calcs (a void, hadscape, etc.)? Also, there is a future building proposed within the same property by the same client that would seek LEED certification. To avoid doubling the use of the same open space on credits for the future project, should I leave part of the site's property out of the current LEED boundary to leave open area for the proposed future building? I want to be logical, without causing extra cost for the current LEED building (especially do not want to include the auxilary building in the energy calcs, because the function of the building makes i an energy hog),and wihtout shooting myself in the foot for the future project. I also want to avoid GerryMeandering (no Austin powers move:))!
Garry Black replied Sustainability Manager Jul 26 2010
Summer,
If you have not seen this document it might provide you some additional guidance LEED 2009 MPR Supplemental Guidance v1. It is located on the resources/resources and tools webpage. Hope it helps.
Summer Gorder replied Jul 27 2010
Thank you Garry. I have read that document though, which had very helpful information, although that information drove the specifics of this questions, especially in regards to the small secondary building. Since it does not meet MPR 5 it does not need to be counted for credit or prereq compiance, but then how is it treated? For the future building, the sphere of influence is hard to determine, but I want to take it into consideration when determining this LEED boundary. Any case studies or examples would be appreciated!
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Jul 27 2010
I think MPR #5 is very clear in that buildings with less than 1 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. may attain LEED certification, they simply can't use the rating system in its entirety. Meaning they can use LEED but can't earn any points under the IEQ section. This is spelled out in the MPR supplemental guidance.
Summer, we've discussed this on another forum and I don't see how you can avoid counting the supplemental building within your project boundary and fully including it in LEED calcs. I'm prepared to be corrected, though, if someone can give me a good reason!
As for the future building, I think it could be awkward to adjust your site boundary now in consideration of that, although I suppose if there's a reasonable non-gerrymandering way to do it, to give both projects balanced benefit as far as SS credits, you could do it.
You might look at Schools SSc9: SIte Master Plan as a possible innovation credit.
Summer Gorder replied Jul 27 2010
Triston, I appreciate your feddback, and did notice that wording in the MPR #5, although it does not make sense to me that a separate building with a unique function (impossible to make LEED certified due to federal criteria of that type of buiding) should have to negatively affect a project that is going for LEED certification when it is just a secondary building, especially when that building can not even achieve any IEQ points. I feel like I am in some gray area. Are you saying that building would be included in the other building's calcs? The energy model shows a dip of 34% savings to barely meeting the 10% savings requirement just due to the function of the building. I am really hoping there is an example exception.
Summer Gorder replied Jul 27 2010
Triston, does what you mentioned to Rachael McClain on March 2 apply to this project, whcih suggests I could treat it like a campus and leave the building out of the LEED Boundary?
Tristan Roberts replied Editor – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, LLC Jul 27 2010
Summer, I think I had previously suggested that you review the LEED application guide for multiple buildings and campuses—have you found that to be helpful?
Rachael's question sounded different in that those were pre-existing buildings that could be excluded from the LEED boundary without gerrymandering.
Have you talked with GBCI about this? I have to emphasize that they are the authorities and whatever I say is just my best interpretation of their rules. They might be able to help you clarify things.
the LEED Project Boundary and auxiliary buildings
hey Summer -
You have two options:
1) Include the auxiliary building within the LPB of the larger building. The ground under the footprint of the auxiliary building has to be taken into account when calculating sites credits (SSc5 in particular), but not for other credits, such as energy.
2) draw the LPB around the auxiliary building so as to allow for that building to pursue LEED in the future
I hope this is helpful!
~cm
Summer Gorder replied Aug 06 2010
Thank you Cara. That completely answers my questions about the auxiliary building that will not have an 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. and will not be pursuing lead. The only part of my question that is still unclear is a third proposed building on the site that would pursue LEED certification. Since it will be a future building on an existing LEED building property (assuming we stick to including the whole site in the LEED Boundary) can any outdoor space that was not included in the original LEED buildings calculations count towards the third future building? I was thinking of showing the area that is needed to meet the criteria of the credits sought by the first LEED Building, and register the future building as part of a Block so the same reviewers that are familiar with the site work on both projects. I also have been reading about Multiple Buildings as a precedent study, since it is not updated to LEED 3.0, 2009, and it seems to support some credits could be counted (i.e. stormwater, site development, heat island, water efficient landscaping) if the existing LEED Building did not use that area for compliance. Any thoughts or suggestions?
Please register to use the forum.