Last chance to comment on LEED v5

Comment on V5: We need Bird Collision Reduction

I strongly supported the incorporation of Bird Collision Reduction into the Light Pollution Reduction credit in the first draft of V5 and was shocked to see the second draft had removed bird collision reduction altogether.

Birds may not be a building occupant, but their health and safety affects our own. Birds are bioidicators for the environment around them and also provide many ecosystem services upon which we depend like pest control, plantlife promotion, etc. Not to mention, the value they bring to quality views and outdoor soundscapes in irreplaceable. Therefore, bird-safe building design is not just a Sustainable Sites issue but also important to Indoor Environmental Quality.

Collisions with buildings is a largely preventable cause of bird deaths best addressed through design. Nevertheless, outside of the now unavailable pilot credit, LEED has not encouraged new construction projects to be bird-safe and in some respects, the guidelines are actually making the problem worse. LEED v5 promotes biodiverse habitats outside and incentivizes quality views and biophilia inside, but without collision protection in place, a project with these features would entrap and lure birds to their deaths much more effectively than the baseline building. Speaking from my own experience in completing a v4.1 Platinum project in 2022, how can a building considered to be the pinnacle of sustainability not account for bird collisions? In overlooking this issue, even with the best of intentions, we have built a new Silent Spring, and continuing this injustice is unacceptable in the fifth iteration of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.

I strongly urge USGBC to make sure Bird Collision Reduction is not just a part of V5, but a measure that is worth enough points to make it a popular feature among all future LEED projects. It could be its own credit, but since Light Pollution Reduction is needed in tandem with building design and bird friendly glazing for effective bird collision reduction, it does make sense to combine the credits as originally proposed. However, if combined, the credit should be worth at least 2 points, as light pollution reduction and bird friendly facades are often measures that require each their own design strategies and associated costs, each warranting their own point value. Even as separate credits, Light Pollution Reducation should be a requisite in order to achieve the Bird Collision Redution credit, and as previously stated, the Bird Collision Reduction credit should be given more point weight or an EP status that would make it more worthwhile to pursue.

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the second draft of LEED V5 publicly and greatly hope my suggestions are taken into account for the next draft.

Thank you,

Mikki Heckman, AIA, LEED AP BD+C
Powers Brown Architecture