Hi all, I'm working on a LEED-NC v3 major renovation project that has veered just below it's 50% MRc2 CWM target and have 2 questions below:
Please note: We are pursuing 3 pts for the MRc1.1 Building Reuse: Maintain Existing Walls, Floors & Roof credit. We are not pursuing the MRc1.2 Building Reuse: Maintain Existing Interior Nonstructural Elements credit. We are also not pursuing the MRc3 Materials Reuse credit.
My first question relates to the potential for us to include in our CWM numbers refurbished terrazzo flooring. There was a design intention to keep flooring in parts of the building as part of its historical character as opposed to removing it and replacing with a new material. Since this is technically a 'floor finish" (like carpet or tile, etc) as opposed to a structural element, could it be included in the CWM numbers?
My second question relates to a large quantity of custom aluminum window frame elements that were unique in the 1960s but did not perform well thermally. Our project wanted to keep the original custom window frame appearance and re-detailed these windows adding some aluminum to the assembly and created triple-glazed thermally broken units in place of the original single-glazed units - as opposed to pulling out the original windows and replacing with all new. Do you think these original mullion elements could count towards diverted waste?
Your insight is much appreciated...
Tim
RETIRED
LEEDuser Expert
623 thumbs up
February 20, 2015 - 5:00 pm
Tim - It is unfortunate you are just below 50%. On renovation projects in some markets, the demolished materials cannot be easily recycled and without a lot of waste due to limited new materials, it can be hard to meet MRc2's thresholds. Are you sure you accounted for all materials that were diverted from the landfill during the demolition - like any concrete, metals, or salvaged materials?
Response to Question #1: If you are pursuing MRc1, you cannot also count the diverted materials for MRc2. See details under Related Credits on pages 348, 352, and 358 of the first edition of the LEED Reference Guide. I think that since you are pursuing MRc1.1, this would apply to your situation, but you did not say if you are counting the flooring in MRc1.1 or not. Check out the two last FAQs for MRc1.2 - http://www.leeduser.com/credit/NC-2009/MRc1.2.
Response to Question #2: That is reuse - not recycling of materials and hence they can't count under MRc2. To count as reuse for LEED for MRc3, on-site "fixed components" must no longer be able to serve their original functions and must then be installed for a different use or in a different location. That paragraph in the Reference Guide continues: "Other reused materials found on-site. Components that are retained and continue to serve their original function, such as door hardware, are eligible for this credit."
Tim Gaidis
Sustainable Design LeaderHOK
6 thumbs up
February 20, 2015 - 1:56 pm
Hi Michelle, thank you for the reply. Yes, unfortunately much of the (heavy) waste we had originally projected as being able to divert ended up having to be removed as part of an asbestos abatement effort.
Maybe my approach is based more on "landfill diversion" than recycling.
On question #1, our MRc1.1 re-use calculations do not necessarily include the terrazzo floor finish but do include much of the building primary structure and envelope components. I feel like we would not be double-counting because of this...? I also cannot seem to find language in the Ref Guide (like at the top of page 349) or elsewhere that clarifies this. I understand some other projects have been able to meet 3 pts of MRc1.1 but have replaced carpeting that was originally on the floor (and diverted the carpet waste, counting it in MRc2).
On question #2, the design team discussed approaches that would have had all of the original aluminum window framing removed (and ostensibly recycled to keep it out of the landfill which could also have been a destination for it), but we designed around using that material at the building site to keep it out of the waste flow. this seems to present a paradox of keeping the material out of the waste flow, but not being able to count it.
What do you think?
Thanks again...Tim
RETIRED
LEEDuser Expert
623 thumbs up
February 20, 2015 - 4:53 pm
Tim - Re: Question #1: If you are not counting the terrazzo in MRc1.1, then you could try counting it in MRc2. The second to last FAQ under MRc1.2 (http://www.leeduser.com/credit/NC-2009/MRc1.2) is all about double counting, which is NOT what you appear to be doing. Per that FAQ, I don't think there is official guidance on this issue but it makes sense on a gut level to not double count.
Re: Question #2: While an admirable effort, I still think this is reuse, which does keep items out of the waste stream. Look at "Don't confuse materials reuse with building reuse" under MRc3 - http://www.leeduser.com/credit/NC-2009/MRc3. According to that information, if the on-site reused materials are used on site for another purpose or in another location, you CAN count them for both MRc3 and MRc2. The frames are in the same place and aren't they serving the same purpose? If you can make a case otherwise, then it seems you can count them under MRc2.
I hope you're not depending on this point to get you to threshold in LEED and that you have some cushion elsewhere.
Tim Gaidis
Sustainable Design LeaderHOK
6 thumbs up
February 20, 2015 - 5:20 pm
Thanks again for this additional info Michelle. We are over our Gold threshold by a couple of points, but the margin is closer than I'd like. I will likely submit the information and just see what the reviewers say - at least that way we will get a formal reading on the issue/approach.
Again, thanks for your quick feedback today!
Best,
Tim