Hi all,
I have a medical clinic project that got a No Smoking signage review comment about not having signage at the Soiled Linen, Electrical and Sprinkler Riser room doors. After more than 100 submittals, this the first time I have ever seen someone flag doors like these (vendor/maintenance access) for no smoking signage. I am aware that the credit language says all entries, and we have certainly been careful about outdoor terraces and amenity spaces. It's always difficult to know in this kind of situation if this is a one off comment by this particular reviewer, or if we need to make sure on all future projects that spaces like this are acknowledged as "entries". Does anyone have any insight on this?
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - SustainabilityEUA
LEEDuser Expert
530 thumbs up
August 29, 2024 - 1:14 pm
It has been my experience that GBCI will allow project teams to exclude emergency egress doors if they are alarmed.
All other exterior doors require no smoking signage within 10 feet. (v4.1 does not require the signs to be within 10 feet)
Curious if others are seeing comments from GBCI to also include 'No Vaping' and "No Cannibas" language in the signage.
Hope this helps!
Emily Purcell
Sustainable Design LeadCannonDesign
LEEDuser Expert
370 thumbs up
August 29, 2024 - 1:18 pm
Wow, I've gotten some EQp2 comments I think are too stringent but never this one! I would definitely follow up with GBCI on this one. Even if someone here confirms that this is the new review approach, it shouldn't go without feedback about how...overenthusiastic...it is :)
I have found that v4.1 in general is less stringently reviewed than v4 for this one, since although the crdit requirements are essentially the same, the v4.1 language about communicating the policy is much more open ended.
Michelle Rosenberger
PartnerArchEcology
522 thumbs up
August 29, 2024 - 1:42 pm
Thanks to both of you. Yes, I was looking at the v4.1 language due to your comment Dave on the forum about the 10' distance. The language reads to me like cannabis and E-cigarettes would definitely have to be in your policy. But more interesting to me, it reads like you don't have to have signage at all. Just an enforcement policy. Are you reading it that way? No smoking signage has been a bedrock fundamental since time began with LEED. I am always interested when something like that shifts.
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - SustainabilityEUA
LEEDuser Expert
530 thumbs up
August 29, 2024 - 2:30 pm
I believe you are correct, per the v4.1 RG language signage is not required if there are provisions in place to enforce the no smoking policy.
I have tried to pursue the 'provisions are in place' path in lieu of signage with no success. It has been my experience that GBCI will still request proof of signage with the v4.1 prerequisite.
Large 'no smoking campus' projects do not like the no smoking signage at every door - however I have not come across a non-signage strategy that GBCI will approve.
Michelle Rosenberger
PartnerArchEcology
522 thumbs up
August 29, 2024 - 2:42 pm
Interesting and not surprising. Thanks for the input Dave.
Emily Purcell
Sustainable Design LeadCannonDesign
LEEDuser Expert
370 thumbs up
August 29, 2024 - 3:38 pm
Interesting - on a recent review that was otherwise very picky, I had this prereq awarded (under v4.1) with a simple owner letter saying "the campus is non-smoking and there is signage at campus entries stating the no smoking policy." [eta: plus a copy of the policy]
Seems like this is really all over the place.
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - SustainabilityEUA
LEEDuser Expert
530 thumbs up
August 30, 2024 - 9:17 am
very interesting Emily, thank you for posting!
on a current project we initially submitted this language:
"Smoking is not allowed within the building or on the project site, hence there are no designated smoking areas within the property boundary. This pertains to tobacco smoke, as well as smoke produced from the combustion of cannabis and controlled substances and the emissions produced by electronic smoking devices. This policy will be communicated to occupants of the building/site and provisions for enforcement will be self-policed."
GBCI issued a mid-review clarification:
1. The smoking policy provided in the documentation does not appear to be proactively communicated to all occupants. The signed owner letter does not indicate how the policy will be communicated to building occupants and visitors. Note that it is required that the smoking policy be proactively communicated to occupants at regular time periods. Provide a desription of how the smoking policy is communicated.
2. The smoking policy provided in the documentation indicates that the policy will be self-policed but does not provide information on enforcement. Note that it is required for the project to have in place provisions for either enforcement of the no smoking policy or posting of no smoking signage near all the building entrances and/or all main vehicular and pedestrian entrances to the site such that the policy is effectively communicated to all occupants.
We updated our policy AND added signage at all required locations - GBCI approved this approach.
Michelle, echoing your comment "No smoking signage has been a bedrock fundamental since time began with LEED. I am always interested when something like that shifts." you are 100% correct!!