Discrepancy in Peak occupancy and daily average

The comment looks like a typo to me, I would ask the review team for clarification. Typically the peak value would be higher than the average value as it represents the maximum number of people in the building at any single time. The average must (by definition) be less. What are your average and peak values?

I would time average the occupants during the period the building is fully occupied (9-6).

Daily Average can be more than the peak, depending on the occupancy assumptions. Assuming the give occupancies are peaks for a typical work day, that all occupants are full-time, and that the average occupancy is 95% of the peak.

A. 9AM - 6PM -- Peak 115, Average 109
B. 2PM - 10PM -- Peak 12, Average 11
C. 10PM - 6AM -- Peak 12, Average 11

Peak, Apeak + Bpeak (Shifts Overlaps) = 115 + 12 = 127
Average, Aavg + Bavg + Cavg = 109 + 11 + 11 = 131
AVERAGE > PEAK

If the assumption was 90% occupancy average:

A. 9AM - 6PM -- Peak 115, Average 104
B. 2PM - 10PM -- Peak 12, Average 10
C. 10PM - 6AM -- Peak 12, Average 10

Peak, Apeak + Bpeak (Shifts Overlaps) = 115 + 12 = 127
Average, Aavg + Bavg + Cavg = 104 + 10 + 10 = 125
PEAK > AVERAGE

Was the reviewer comment specifcly about employees or transients?
My comment below is from a longer post dated 8/23/2012 that may apply:
"Daily Average is confusing. It should probably say “Average of daily total transients.” Assume an average, typical day (not a slow or unusually busy day). If you counted every transient visitor and every transient retail customer who walked through the door, those numbers are what you enter in the Daily Average row. Those two numbers get carried into WEp1 to calculate how many toilet flushes and sink uses occur on an average day for transients..."

If you are still unsure, you might want to send a question via the GBCI Contact page at:
http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact/Contact-Us/Project-Certification-Que...
Choose "Question about review comments" from the drop down menu.

Hernado - Is there some guidance on this that I've missed (which is entirely possible!) It makes sense to add the average occupants for each shift (if we are talking about transients as David suggests) but it makes no sense to add the peak occupants for each shift - the maximum number of occupants in the building at any one time is the peak - this should not be dependent upon shifts.

Michael,

There is no hard guidance that I am aware of. You need to make a claim that is defensible.

Peaks A and B should be added together because in the example given the shifts overlap from 2PM to 6 PM. The occupants for both shifts are working at the same time for the overlapping hours.

In most cases, adjusting occupancies doesn't make any difference in the water savings percentage claimed. This occurs when you have a single occupancy group, assuming a 50:50 male:female occupancy, and all occupants have access to the same fixtures (no unisex restrooms on one floor out of several). In this case it matters not whether you have 2 or one million occupants, the percentage savings is identical.

So, if there is one occupancy group in the example will not make any difference for water use savings, but, because shifts overlap, more bike spaces would be required.

In terms of assuming a daily average occupancy based on full employment for the projects you could assume an average of three weeks of vacation per year, plus two weeks of holidays, plus two weeks out of the office for travel. Your assumption would be (52 - 3 - 2 -2)/52, with 52 being the total weeks in a year. The result would be an average occupancy of 86.5%.

The above type of adjustment is something you shouldn't have to do for most project types. Water savings would not not change. Reuse of gray water would be less. Number of bike spaces is based on peak occupancy so there would be no difference.