LEED Users, what are your thoughts and experiences with LEED Documentation?
I've seen a couple of posts from Karen Joslin about LEED 2012 likely not being "ready" for the marketplace based on experience with 2009 forms and reviews. LEED User has been great in the tips & resources available and the forum discussions. Yet it reveals much confusion, even among "elite users" about satisfying requirements and responding to reviewers.
What confidence can we have for new versions in terms of ease of use and ability for the building industry to continue transformation? (In our state the IGCC is no where near being adopted.)
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Rob Watson
CEOECON Group
170 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 1:03 pm
Which letter is this, Barry?
Peggy White
White + GreenSpec88 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 1:11 pm
Yea Barry - do tell! :o) Was it anything like his entertaining rant at the NCC Gala last week?
Barry Giles
Founder & CEO, LEED Fellow, BREEAM FellowBuildingWise LLC
LEEDuser Expert
338 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 1:11 pm
Rob
A followup from Rick's plaque cermony at Integral last week and NCC's GreenSuper hero's (you missed a great evening)...Integral got the highest LEED CI certification on the Planet (or so Rick says)...now that's great...we loved being part of that...but if we continue to push the bar in point numbers higher and higher...what does that prove? The parrallel to that is Energy Star...once the score reaches 98...what does 99 prove?
Others have mentioned that with point reduction in credits that 'high scores' are not achievable...if that is correct then Platinum in V4 would REALLY mean something
Barry Giles
Founder & CEO, LEED Fellow, BREEAM FellowBuildingWise LLC
LEEDuser Expert
338 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 1:15 pm
Peggy...I'm shocked...Rick didn't rant did he?...OK, OK...so it was a little pointed and at a major public event.
But remembering Rick's comment about being the highest LEED ever got me thinking that the Platinum bar needs to be a lot harder to achieve
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5907 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 1:54 pm
To address the original issue - the documentation and review process I think is the Achilles heel of LEED. It is currently pretty much a punitive process that is viewed negatively by customers as something to endure to get your reward. We need to change the process to make it a mostly positive and value-added experience.
We need to consider and test alternative certification review methods including a greater degree of reviewer-customer interaction including possible site visits. I recently went through a Green Globes certification (the project failed to meet a LEED prerequisite and the client was expecting monies tied to LEED or GG certification) which was far more positive in nature.
So I think the specific tools and requirements are actually the least of our worries. It is the fundamental process which needs to change IMO.
Barry Giles
Founder & CEO, LEED Fellow, BREEAM FellowBuildingWise LLC
LEEDuser Expert
338 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 2:00 pm
Marcus...are you suggesting 'dump GBCI' and take the BREEAM route?
Michelle Teague
Architect, LEED ConsultantPolk Stanley Wilcox Architects
39 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 2:20 pm
Marcus, well put. I think a place to begin is with the MPRs. LEED boundaries have been a sticking point in all our LEED projects. A "simple site" it the exception to the rule in our office. Early interaction (and cost friendly) to work out a logical boundary with your reviewer on which to base future calculations (or decide to part ways with LEED) would be a great step. I do not think this should be a pay-per one-way communication void of graphics that are CIRs.
Suggestions for others?
Barry Giles
Founder & CEO, LEED Fellow, BREEAM FellowBuildingWise LLC
LEEDuser Expert
338 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 2:31 pm
Marcus...are you suggesting 'dump GBCI' and take the BREEAM route? It bares discussion. Certainly I see no reason for the top teams not to be able to ‘self certify’ Certified and maybe Silver projects…with GBCI stepping in and doing reviews on an ad hoc basis. (al la BREEAM). But Gold and Platinum should take the GBCI route. This self certifying route would take a lot of pressure off of GBCI. Another option could be to reassess the points level and reduce Certified to 35 points or maybe 30 points…this would help to bring in more buildings.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5907 thumbs up
June 1, 2012 - 2:55 pm
I would never suggest dumping GBCI! I am suggesting that we come up with better ideas on how to do reviews and pilot several options to see what works best. We need to maintain the integrity of the system so it needs to be somewhat rigorous but in a more streamlined, effective and positive manner.
Barry your idea is just what I am talking about, lets pilot a process where teams which have submitted successful, accurate documentation on multiple projects can utilize a more streamlined approach.