Hi,

under "LEEDuser’s viewpoint" your only refer to Option 2:

"This credit is an extension of the outdoor water use prerequisite. It uses the same methodology and awards a point for exceeding the prerequisite requirement of 30% and reaching 50% savings. A second point can be earned by demonstrating 100% savings, but this path requires teams to use alternative water sources such as non-potable, recycled, or reclaimed."

I would recommend to clarify that with Option 1 (no irrigation) 2 credit points can always archieved (as long no healthcare):

"Option 1. No irrigation required (2 points except Healthcare, 1 point Healthcare)

Show that the landscape does not require a permanent irrigation system beyond a maximum two-year establishment period."

(Credit language)

Cheers,

Mark

Hi everybody,

I've got two questions regarding the pilot credit "No Cooling Tower" which is an alternative compliance path to the LEED v4 credits Cooling tower water use (BD+C).

1)

If I read the credit requirements under the credit library, the first bullet point is confusing me:

Projects without Cooling Towers or Evaporative Condensers (Headline)

Projects may earn full credit if all conditions are met:

• the baseline system designated for the building using ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Appendix G Table G3.1.1 includes a cooling tower (systems 7 & 8)
• the project design case does not include a cooling tower
• ......
• ......

I don't understand the following part at the end of the first bullet point: "includes a cooling tower".

Therefor my question is: Why should the building system have a cooling tower included? As I understand the pilot credit "No Cooling Tower", this credit can only be applied to projects without a cooling tower. Otherwise I might misunderstand the credit intent or do not read the first bullet point correctly. 

2)

To my project: Based on the floor area, which is more the 14,000 sqm, the project falls within the systems 7 and 8. The heat will be generated by a condensing gas boiler plus heat pumps.  The building will be cooled by a closed cooling circuit which is filled with water. The building does not have a cooling tower and will be designed in accordance with System 7 (ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Appendix G Table G3.1.1). My question to the designated baseline system: Are the credit requirements fulfilled if my project complies EITHER with System 7 OR with System 8, or does the project has to comply with System 7 AND 8?

Thanks in advance for your answers and help.

Best regards

Hello,

our project does not have a general contractor to manage the whole of the projects waste. Some tradesmen generating small amounts of waste will take their mixed waste back to their yard. They collect from different sites that they are working at and usually separate their waste, but they do not weigh the waste amount per construction site. Is there any way we still could earn this credit? Thanks!

Hi! 

I am working on my Master thesis and analyse the usability of LEEDv4 material credits in Germany. As far as i know, in previous version LEED2009 german certification " Der Blaue Engel" was acceptetd by USGBC. How ist it in LEEDv4? I could not find this program in the list. 

Thank you in advance!

I am not quite sure if the approach discussed in my project team is a viable way to achieve this credit and would like to check back with you. The project is in a dense city location and will be impermeable to 80-90%. There is zero lot line on 2 sides, a zero lot line neighbour on the third side and a basement for most of the site, with the building and open space above. There will be a strip next to the building insite the site limits, 5 metres wide, that is part of an adjacent plaza, has no basement below and will have an almost impermeable surface.

This strip next to the building is the only place where rainwater could be infiltrated. The project team proposed to build a structure below this strip that will infiltrate rainwater and retain any rainwater up to the required percentile that exceeds that infiltration rate. The structure will be covered and not be seen from the surface. It would be designed to retain and infiltrate percentile rain as required for the pursued number of points.

Some questions arise:

1. Given that there is a 5 metre wide strip next to the building footprint I assume this project cannot be taken as zero lot line? Is there a definition of “…nearly aligns with the site limits”?
2. Is this kind of covered, underground infiltration trench compliant with the requirements “best replicating natural site hydrology”, is this a LID measure?

Thanks for any views, tips and hints.

I am not quite sure if this is the USGBC's intent, and maybe I'm a nitpicker, but:

-Biofuel "(in some cases)" is eligible, the "some cases" are not further described

-ineligible biofuels include treated wood and forest biomass WASTE

The above would mean (for me), that wood grown and chopped only to burn it is a eligible biofuel in a large urban DES, as long as it is not coated, treated for preservation, or it is waste wood.

Is this correct? For me it seems this does not really fit the intent. Or is this wood fired DES not compliant anyway as the wood is not grown within the project boundary?

In this project there is only a very limited number of parking spaces (44 for >10.000m² office space). The parking spaces will not be publicly available but rented out to tenants and may used on a personal basis (i.e. space 43 is reserved for Mr. X).

Theoretically preferred parking is possibly (in terms of signage) but will probably lead to the situation that the preferred parking spaces will not be used at all.

Does anyone have an idea how the credit can be achieved in this situation?

For Green Vehicle credit this is easier, as "Mr.X" can only get specific spaces if he drives a compliant car.

In a multi tenant CS office building smoking is prohibited in the entire building (Option 1). However the owner wishes to execute a few single person offices as designated smoking rooms. All conditions such as deck to deck partition, pressure difference and blower door testing according to Option 2 will be met.

I am wondering, whether a single person office can be considered a designated smoking room?

While its occupant may be a smoker, it cannot be ruled out, that a non-smoking colleague (secretary) would need to enter this room for the purpose of her work.

Does anyone of you have experience with this case?

Is it allowed to install additional door arrest systems or free-swinging closers to the self-closing doors, so that in case the occupant is able to keep the door open for a short period? This should be for example an additional help for the cleaning staff to drive the cleaning trolley into the cleaning room.

Many thanks in advance for your help.

Dear all,

We have mechanically ventilated spaces. For the option 1 we therefore have to comply with the requirement B. interior cross-contamination prevention. To create negative pressure we provide exhaust rates of 0.50 cfm per square foot (2.54 l/s per square meter) for all the spaces where hazardous gases or chemicals may be present or used, except in the garage. For the garage we want to implement airlocks with overpressure (The USGBC states that an airlock is a reasonable way to avoid contaminants from the parking areas from migrating into occupied spaces).

To avoid contaminants our strategy is to install airlocks to every staircase core which connect the parking areas with the occupied areas.

Elevators which serve the parking areas with the occupied areas will be equipped with elevator lobbies with self-closing doors and deck-to-deck partitions. Do we have to install airlocks with overpressure in front of the elevator lobbies, do we have to establish elevator lobbies with overpressure or is the ingress of contaminates with an elevator lobby with self-closing doors excluded and we do not need to install airlocks here? What do you think?

Many thanks in advance for your help.