Including Gyms in Regularly Occupied Spaces

I think that they may be considered regularly occupied but may be excluded from the calculations if properly explained. The official rulings are below

Per CIR for NC 2.1
9/8/2004 - Ruling: ...Regarding the gym space, many projects have utilized daylight strategies which can limit glare problems in gyms. For instance, diffuse skylights and diffuse windows are often used to mitigate the negative effects of direct sunlight. However it is possible that some gym activities could be hindered by daylighting. Therefore, to exclude the gym space from the calculations, please provide a narrative describing gym activities and how daylighting will hinder these activities.

and

11/27/2002 - CIR: ...Therefore, we are proposing that certain areas, such as the field house and the competition gym, be excluded from the baseline calculations of regularly occupied spaces. ...
3/4/2003 - Ruling: ...(1) the spaces described are not regularly occupied; and (2) the use of daylight in the space could have detrimental effects on the people using the facilities. As such, these spaces can be excluded from the daylighting calculations. ...

Has anyone had success excluding gymnasiums from daylight and/or views for LEED 2009 for schools? They are included in the list of 'Regularly occupied Spaces: Classroom and Core Learning' so I assumed they were more strict about it for the 2009 version. Are the CIRs from previous LEED for Schools still being accepted for EQc8?

Technically v2 CIRs do not apply to v2009 projects. Additionally, the 'LEED Green Building Design and Construction Reference Guide, 2009 Edition' notes the following:

- Page 404 list gymnasiums as Regularly Occupied Core Learning Spaces.
- Page 556 (5th bullet down) "Because some activities in
these spaces may be hindered by daylight, effective shades and lighting controls should be included in the design."

Right, but since CIRs can still be submitted on a case-by-case basis I was just curious to see if anyone has had success with excluding gymnasiums for a 2009 Schools project. Based on the conversations above, it sounded like people might be attempting it for the new version - it would be great to hear GBCI responses people have received

Based on my experience on a school project that was certified LEED Gold under the LEED for Schools 2009 rating system I learned one very important detail. Your schedule of spaces for both Daylighting and Views must be identical. I tried to exclude the gymnasium from Views but wanted to include it in Daylighting because we were toplighting with solar tubes. I ended up letting go of the Views credit when the reviewer denied it for this reason. I think excluding the gym from daylighting might be difficult because you could use either solar tubes or Kalwall to mitigate the glare concern and achieve the desired level of daylighting.

This is an extension of the gym/views issue. I understand that the gym is listed as a reg. occupied space. I also understand that the schedules for IEQc8.1 and 8.2 should match, unless there is a special circumstance that is acceptable by the reviewers. My question: has anyone successfully justifed why you would not include the gym for Views? I would think that the issue of basketballs + low glass would not be a good combination, but wondered if anyone has been able to get the omission approved?

John, did you try to justify exculding the gym from views based on the use of the space? We are trying to exclude the gym from views and include it in daylighting for the same reason - use of solatubes.

There was a CIR regarding this issue in LEED V2.2, on 3/22/2007:

"Since the gymnasium and auditorium would be hindered by the inclusion of vision glazing between the heights of 2'6" and 7'6", the project may exclude these areas from the EQc8.2 calculations. Please clearly delineate the areas of the project being excluded from the calculations and provide a narrative describing the rationale and assumptions made for each excluded area in the certification documentation for this credit."

This was based on the use of the gym for indoor soccer.

I was under the assumption that you could exclude it from views and include in on daylighting. Do the lists really have to match? What did the reviewer say?

Sonrisa, were you successful in having the gym excluded for the Views calc (but keeping it in for the Daylighting clac)? We have a similar situation, and wondered how you (or anyone else with similar scenario) faired with attempting this situation in LEED v3/2009.

I don't know if this issue has been resolved, but I want to let you know that we just got comments back for a project where we are using the Gym for the Daylight credit but excluding it from Views, arguing safety and privacy reasons. We argued that low windows may be impacted and broken by balls and that owner would not like general public to have visual access to kid's gym classes.

This is LEED for schools 2009; they accepted our arguments and anticipate awards of credits (both daylight and views). I hope this information is useful...

Thanks for sharing, Eri. We love feedback from user experience!

We are attempting to exclude the gym from the views credit. Based on the IEQ space matrix on USGBC's site (http://www.usgbc.org/resources/eq-space-type-matrix), the gymnasium is not considered regularly occupied for credit IEQc8.2 views (it is included in IEQc8.1, daylight). It sounds like Eri was able to submit it this way in Dec 2012. My question is how to submit this with the LEED online forms - the regularly occupied gross area automatically populates on the current IEQc8.2 LEED form based on the occupied area entered in the PIf3 form. If I enter the views area excluding the gym, it makes the percentage too low to get the credit. How have people handled the form inputs to account for the gym being excluded from regularly occupied areas for views?

We are doing an elementary school project, under LEED 2009, and have the same question as Celeste above. Per the 10/13 IEQ Space Matrix, the Gym is included in calcs for daylighting, but not views. However, the online forms use the same data for both IEQc8.1 and 8.2 - making it seemingly impossible to get both credits with a gym in the project. Can we use the 7/12 IEQ Space Matrix for a LEED 2009 project? That removes the gym from both IEQc8.1 and 8.2, resolving the problem. If not, how do we document these two credits to show that we comply with the gym counted towards daylighting, and the gym not counted towards views?

You can not use previous versions of the Space Matrix, so the gym must be included in the calculations for daylight.

Since this is a school, you'll be using LEED for schools credit forms, which separates out core learning spaces versus other spaces. In the 10/13 space matrix gyms are not core learning spaces, so it will fall under other in the Daylight and Views Calculator. Being that is "other" in the calculator, it's values are separated both in calculator and credit form. If the gym does not effect your points total, then just ensure its square footage is included in the calculations.

Depending on the version of the form, you can manually enter the total areas which allows you to exclude those spaces that are not regularly occupied and therefore can be documented.

Many times I've seen additional calculations included when spaces like the gym could not be excluded because of being linked.