I completed option 1. My LEED-CI project is a confidential project, but is located in a dense urban area with well-developed public transportation. It seems too easy to earn the point in such a city. It might be difficult, but it may be fair to have some kind of baseline. Let's say, if it's in a densely developed area with good public transportation, the requirements could be little bit stricter? It is difficult to develop requirements that is challenging to projects all over the world, since LEED is US based system, but maybe New York city, San Francisco, and DC could be good samples to develop the requirements further?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Chris Marshall
Manager, LEED Technical DevelopmentU.S. Green Building Council
182 thumbs up
August 1, 2011 - 11:39 am
You raise a very good question, one that we've considered before. At this point in developing the credit, we'll likely keep a single set of thresholds. This is far easier to implement, maintain, and (for project teams) understand, especially if project teams work in multiple location types (urban core, suburban fringe, etc.). By having a single set of thresholds, we'll appropriately reward projects that locate in areas with robust transit systems; but the single set also give a "way in" for projects with nascent transit systems. The points earned in the credit (and, subsequently, the entire LT category) therefore reflect the building's performance with respect to location and transportation. We agree that all projects - regardless of location - should be motivated to improve. But, in some instances, we simply want to appropriately reward projects for what they already have (i.e. locations surrounded by good transit). This bolsters the ability of a LEED scorecard to transparently indicate how green the building is.
Jens Apel
134 thumbs up
August 9, 2011 - 3:27 am
I think the pilot is already tightening the requirements compared to the current system where you get full points regardless of the number of trips. The thresholds may be adjusted to reflect the good transportation availability in city centres. In our project located in a big european city we exceed the thresholds as well by far.
What I think might be more complicated is the minimum transit service on weekends. In business districts the weekend trips might be reduced by more than a third compared to weekdays and projects may get less or no points although the environmental impact of little weekend service may be small (assuming Monday to Friday workweek).
Jon Texter
PresidentEssex General Construction, Inc.
71 thumbs up
August 25, 2011 - 4:29 pm
It seems to me that the weekend trips should be weighted differently due to the observation above. If a project is located in an area that has a strong public transit system when the project occupants are using the building, they shouldn't be punished for the times when the building is not occupied.
Fred Dock
Director, Department of TransportationCity of Pasadena, CA
43 thumbs up
August 29, 2011 - 12:25 pm
Technically, the weekday and weekend transit requirements in the Pilot Credit are weighted differently, since the weekend service requirements are lower than the weekday. That said, the level of weekend service that should be available is the subject of continuing discussion by the LP TAG. Weekend transit service has been viewed as a measure of a good transit system and a good location - that is, one that has good accessiblity most of the time by multiple modes - and the credit reflects this by including the weekend service requirement. The points made in the above comments about weekend transit service will be seriously considered before finalizing the credit for LEED 2012.