I budget similar amounts of time as mentioned above on mid to large scale LEED projects with the caveat that I'm finding the preliminary reviews to be more intensive than they have been in the past and am therefore having to allow for more time in documentation review and clarification response.
Does anyone have experience working on smaller projects (under 5000 SF)? It seems to me that it would still take upward of 250 hours, which relative to the budget is significant.
David Posada
Integrated Design & LEED SpecialistSERA Architects
LEEDuser Expert
1980 thumbs up
June 8, 2010 - 6:54 pm
Yes, small projects pursuing LEED can become very time-intensive efforts in relation to their budget. I've seen projects under 10,000 and 5,000 sf with mixed results.
The paradox is that small projects often don't expect spend the time or to produce the level of documentation that larger projects entail. They operate on thinner margins with greater amount of trust and assumptions that come from frequent collaboration or local standard practice. Smaller subs and firms survive by being quick, nimble, well-oiled machines with much less drawn or written down. Asking a large commercial GC to write up a waste management or IAQ plan is a fairly small effort, but for a GC operating out of their truck with no computer it's about as appealing as a tax audit.
Small projects are often the fastest ones, too, so there's even less enthusiasm for extra coordination, research, revision, or waiting for a CIR.
When the stars are aligned in terms of project goals, team experience with LEED, and commitment it can still take more time than small-project budgets may be able to afford. Estimating the staff-hours is tricky: do you try to include all the commissioning, modeling, extra time spent on documentation and meetings by designers, engineers, and contractor, or just the hours for letter templates and LEED online? So depending on how you slice it, 150 to 300 hours is probably not uncommon.