I am currently working on a project where we are returning an historic building to original use (hotel). It was built in 1926 and had been used as a retirement home for the past 45+ years. The plumbing fixtures in place are original and utilize considerable amounts of water (3 GPF) for toilets, etc. In calculating the improvement efficiency, do I have a case to argue that Title 24 - 2005 (California) is an unreasonable 'baseline case'? We show significant improvement from that standard, but the reality is that we are dramatically improving water consumption over the existing conditions.
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
October 15, 2010 - 11:28 pm
I'm curious what kinds of obstacles you're facing in getting water use below the baseline. Theoretically you can replace all the fixtures and fittings necessary to get you there. What's the case you'd make for a looser requirement here?Also, maybe I'm forgetting something obvious, but does LEED require a different baseline for projects subject to CA Title 24?
Rick Blackshere
ArchitectARC140
7 thumbs up
October 18, 2010 - 12:33 pm
Tristan,
My intent may not have been clear. We are not facing obstacles getting water use reduction below baseline. My hope, however, was to show 'real world' savings. Where the reference guide baseline assumes reduction from 1.6 gpf to 1.28, we will be reducing from 3.0 to 1.28. Significantly lower draw on municipal resources.
We have a number of complications which make some other credits very hard to achieve ( historically significant building with large single pane operable windows which must remain), any assist here would increase our desired compliance.
LEED does not require a different baseline for CA Title 24 projects.
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
October 19, 2010 - 5:52 pm
My gut reaction is that you won't be able to successfully argue this. ItsSeems to fall in the category of doing a great job making a big reduction, but it's not something that LEED gives extra credit for.Think about it from a LEED policy perspective, and how difficult it would be to draw a clear line between projects deserving of extra credit for this kind of situation, and projects not deserving. LEED solves this by creating a single benchmark for what it considers a reasonable conventional baseline.You may be able to get extra credit through RPc1, if this is an applicable credit, and through synergies with WEc2. Other thoughts?
Rick Blackshere
ArchitectARC140
7 thumbs up
October 19, 2010 - 5:56 pm
Tristan,
Fair enough. I do understand it must be difficult to try to find an acceptable template for all project types. In a project where we are being both innovative and historically reverential, situations arise where doing the right thing is sometimes rewarded big, other times not so much.
Thanks for your time reviewing this.
Rick
Nick _
Architect, LEED AP42 thumbs up
March 16, 2011 - 5:01 pm
Rick, seems this is one of the obstacles of LEED (real world vs. base case). Unfortunately there's no way to "prove" that you have 3gpf fixtures, and they are not going to send someone to check every renovation project out there. Thus the reliance on a standard as Tristan mentions above.