Hi all!
I'm working with at office building seeking LEED for CS certification. I have these big floor plans of 6383 divided by 3-4 tenants. In my earlier daylight calculations I didn't calculate with the tenant fit outs layout, I just took the whole floor plan areas and the window areas as CS is not taking into account for tenant fit outs. Of course I didn't meet the 75 %. Now I'm thinking that this doesn't say anything how the daylight is provided to the office spaces since it will be seperate office rooms for some tenants and open landscape for some. Do you think I can give it a try to take a few typical tenant fit out layouts to show compliance with this credit?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
TODD REED
Energy Program SpecialistPA DMVA
LEEDuser Expert
890 thumbs up
April 13, 2012 - 8:25 am
I would establish tenant guidelines that dictate appropriate layout designs based on the amount of daylight. Your initial analysis shows you the daylight levels. So based on this, i would establish areas that need to be open office and those that could be enclosed. I would also outline areas that would not be regularly occupied. I think that method has merit because of the use of daylight analysis to help guide the tenant guidelines. This way, no matter who the tenant is, they take advantage of the daylight available.
If anything, it is good practice to show potential tenants and the owner that the guidelines will help in energy reductions and provide a healthier working environment.
Mathilda Jonsson
Environmental Certification Engineer (LEED AP BD+C)Skanska
41 thumbs up
April 24, 2012 - 8:37 am
Thank you Todd for your reply.
The project is already drawing tenants outfits so I hoped that I just could take some of these for examples and show the daylight calculation, you don't think this would be a good idea? My other issue is that the building has first the structure with windows and outside that there is an additional glass facade. One requirement of IEQc8.1 is that the daylight must not go through more than one window, if I'm not misstaken. Is this credit out of reach beacuse of our double facade system?
TODD REED
Energy Program SpecialistPA DMVA
LEEDuser Expert
890 thumbs up
April 24, 2012 - 9:39 am
You will not be able to use the prescriptive path because of the double facade. Simulations or measurements will be your only means to demonstrate credit compliance.
I don;t think that your methodology is a bad idea, but because of this being CS your going to have to show compliance without the fit out. I haven;t read any CIRs for CS to see if the methodology of establishing tenant guidelines to dictate how the floor area will be fit out because of daylight levels. I would be hard press to say that if you submitted this methodology that it would be earned because of the credit language.
You could send an inquiry to GBCI to see if this would be accepted but i'm think that it may not, even though it is commendable and is trying to meet the intent of the credit.
Jill Dalglish, PE
Lighting EngineerMKK Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Expert
440 thumbs up
April 24, 2012 - 3:19 pm
Mathilda and Todd, It was my understanding that we are supposed to create a sample tenant fit out in CS and do the calculations with those. I thought this was the same with the energy modeling credits. Maybe I'm thinking of v2.2? Todd, can you quote where you heard that it has to be done without the fit out? I am not certain either way, but it seems to make more sense to me to do a sample design. And if you already have some tenants I would think you could use their plans as sample plans.
TODD REED
Energy Program SpecialistPA DMVA
LEEDuser Expert
890 thumbs up
April 24, 2012 - 3:44 pm
In EQc 8.2 it requires that a tenant fit out be used in the views calculations. There is nothing in the 8.1 language, unless they added that in the erratta that i missed.
Jill Dalglish, PE
Lighting EngineerMKK Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Expert
440 thumbs up
April 24, 2012 - 4:19 pm
So there is nothing that you know of that says that it CAN'T be done with a sample tenant fit out? Just another example of credit language ambiguity and discontinuity between credits?