SS Credit: Site Development— Open Space : I like the changes to this credit, it makes it easier to understand and implement to achieve the credits intent.
SS Credit: Rainwater Management : I like the consolidation of these two credits and increased value for them. I am not sure that the 'Pre-Columbian' change is necessary, just adds to the difficulty of the calculation. How do you determine the amount of old growth forest on your site in 1491? that is a joke, but you see what I mean.
SS Credit: Heat Island Reduction : I like combining these credits into one,
SS Credit: Light Pollution Reduction : I never understood why this credit has to be so complex. The intent is simple. Low wattage outside, reduced/no light leaving the site, point lights down, turn off the inside lights after everyone leaves. Now I know, there are like 15 comments just on this page alone. It is frustrating that you need a Ph.D in lighting to earn a credit that really should be simple.
Glenn Heinmiller
PrincipalLam Partners
100 thumbs up
September 26, 2011 - 3:33 pm
Jeff,
I agree with you about complexity and wish the credit was simpler. But it’s not easy when you have to define and quantify so that you have something that designers can design to and GBCI reviewers can verify compliance with. How would you suggest that “Low wattage outside”, “reduced/no light leaving the site”, and “point lights down” be defined and quantified? The Heat Island Effect- Roof credit doesn’t say “use light colored roofing”? See what I’m saying?
The credit looks more complicated than it is because it contains two optional paths for uplight control and glare/trespass control.
The draft version of the credit is also going to be much easier than LEED 2009 to show compliance with because the options using BUG ratings require NO computer modeling or calculations.