The second bulleted requirement of Option 1 “Trips are counted only if they are a part of a route with service in opposite directions” is slightly unclear. Our project is located in the major city with an extensive transit program, and has 565 bus trips available from 5 stops within ¼ mile walk distance of our project site, however, none of these stops are served by one route offering service directly in opposite directions. An individual can get to and from work but they will have to ride separate routes, ie. Route A1 which runs North only from home to work and Route B2 which runs South only from work to home. Assuming people can return easily to their origination point, the 2 routes combined should be able to be counted as a "route with service in opposite directions".
Any feedback on whether this can qualify?
Fred Dock
Director, Department of TransportationCity of Pasadena, CA
43 thumbs up
March 1, 2012 - 5:38 pm
The intent of the service in both directions requirement is to give credit for locations that are well-situated with regard to transit that serves daily needs. A site located on a transit route that is essentially a very long one-way loop is less transit-accessible than a site located near a route that provides bi-directional service. The situation that you describe is more complex as it appears that your site is in a transit-served environment, just one that does not afford bi-directional transit service on the same route/street. More information about the why bi-directional service is not provided on these transit routes would be useful to know.
In the absence of such information, it is possible to speculate that the conditions you describe would be the situation if your site is located in a district with a one-way street grid. In that condition, the return direction of a transit route that stops in front of the site may be one or more blocks away on a one-way street that goes in the opposite direction. Alone, the arithmetic of the credit will not adequately illustrate the level of transit service at such a site. However, the requried map, adequately detailed, would illustrate whether equivalent bi-directional route patterns exist in proximity to the site, which should allow consideration of whether the site qualifies for the credit and would establish how to count the routes. However, further evaluation would be necessary before the credit could be granted.
Chris Marshall
Manager, LEED Technical DevelopmentU.S. Green Building Council
182 thumbs up
March 2, 2012 - 10:20 am
Hi Amy, are you simply able to provide us with maps for the A1 and B2 routes? No need to reveal your project location. The route information itself will help Fred and I understand the context. Thanks in advance, and great question!
AMY VAN DAM
Sustainable Design CoordinatorBOULDER ASSOCIATES
20 thumbs up
March 6, 2012 - 2:57 pm
Thanks for the feedback Fred. The project site is located in a city with an abundance of one-way streets as you mentioned and therefore the transit authority has designated routes running in opposite directions with their own unique route numbers.
Emmanuel Pauwels
OwnerGreen Living Projects
137 thumbs up
June 7, 2012 - 4:56 am
I guess opposite directions might be too literal. Different directions could be an alternative wording maybe
Fred Dock
Director, Department of TransportationCity of Pasadena, CA
43 thumbs up
June 7, 2012 - 7:54 pm
The concept of being able to use transit to get to a location and to return to your starting point easily is at the heart of this credit. The TAG for this credit placed great emphasis on defining the utility of the transit system in this regard. The term "different" implies accessibility, but does not convey the "there and back again" emphasis that "opposite" does in the credit language. Will add the different term to the discussion the next time this credit is reviewed.