Energy Model documentation and a why is it so...

Jesse Robbins

Architect

Freeman French Freeman, Inc

LEEDuser Premium Member

0 thumbs up

January 23, 2014

Tristan, Thanks for your offer to get answers. I don't yet have experience in a LEED v4 project, but have been unable to find documentation on using initial vs. long term insulation R values in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 or -2010, the LEED manual, or on LEEDUser. We have been trying to use LTTR for our design models, and it seems that without guidance on which to use, it makes more sense to use the initial values in the LEED model, if only in a grab for points. If others are claiming R-7 per inch for polyiso roof insulation, we'd be penalizing ourselves if we used R-5.7. Also, a why-is-it-so: The one change that really bugs me in LEEDv4 is the "Quality Public Transit" point. We completed a project in Burlington, VT that received 6 points under the v2009 credit and would get zero points under v4, despite the fact that 1/3 of the patrons arrive via transit- a very high rate for a town our size. I commented on this credit several times with the point that any project that earned 6 points under v2009 should at least earn some points under v4 because: a) better to have some transit access than none; incentivizing development in transit served locations is still a worthy goal; b) the revised doesn't seem to consider that the trip counts might not be appropriate for smaller communities; c) the effort I've seen locally and in other communities to provide new long haul commuter transit is great, and ridership is up in many small transit systems. I have a tenant who now buses to his family in St Johnsbury from Burlington and a neighbor who commutes daily to Montpelier, but no credit?

Post a reply

Kathryn West

LEED AP BD+C, O+M, Green Globes Professional

JLL

LEEDuser Basic Member

112 thumbs up

Tue, 02/04/2014 - 16:29

This is the type of thing that keeps me up at night. I am in Atlanta. If you have 1 bus line here that is "quality transit" compared to the options at most buildings. This works in DC, NYC, and Boston but not where I live. I'm going to look transit up long before a Charrette so I can prepare people for the point deficit that they'll probably need to overcome due to the poor transit options in Atlanta.

Tristan Roberts

Representative

Vermont House of Representatives

LEEDuser Expert

7780 thumbs up

Tue, 02/04/2014 - 18:08

I brought this question to USGBC. Apparently the type of situation you are seeing in Burlington was anticipated by the TAG (technical advisory group), and was seen as an area where this credit has has an intentionally higher bar.The concept was that they want the credit to support not just rush-hour use, but to supplement transit beyond that. The concept of the "18-hour destination" was mentioned. Are people in the location relying on transit for trips other than commuting?Another change to this credit is the removal of the shuttle option, and the same concerns were behind that decision.In your situation in Burlington where it sounds like you're talking about a BD+C LEED project, but you have data on actual commuting habits, I would suggest you leapfrog the BD+C requirements and do a transportation survey in line with O+M requirements for LTc1.

Jesse Robbins

Architect

Freeman French Freeman, Inc

LEEDuser Premium Member

0 thumbs up

Tue, 02/04/2014 - 19:27

This is definitely an "18-hour destination", and does have Sunday service as well. The project is a health care clinic and both the patients and staff are arriving by public transit, from as far away as Middlebury or Montpelier. The limited Sunday service is what appears to limit the credit's applicability. I'll maintain that transit in smaller communities still has value, even when the number of trips available doesn't approach the thresholds set in this new credit. I'm fine with getting fewer points, but entirely removing the incentive for building in a transit served location to me negates the work that has been done to expand transit in our region. Thanks for the O+M suggestion, though- I already see a scenario where it may come into play.