Page 354 - The Engineering Guide to LEED-New Construction Sustainable Construction for Engineers

316 Cha pte r Ei g h t

those credits that are still being evaluated for cost and project effectiveness, and “no”
means that the associated credit will probably not be considered for certification of the
subject project. Throughout the life of a project, any of the notations may be moved into
different columns for each credit based on more detailed design, information, and project
team decisions.
These estimated credit checklists are very good tools for directing all the project team
members during the project. However, it may be difficult to fill out the early versions.
This may be particularly difficult if the project is the first for an owner, or the first of its
kind in a region, since it may be difficult to determine which credits are most applicable
and effective for the particular project type and for the regional resources. Various
members of the USGBC and researchers have started to develop ranked lists with columns
expressing the “ease” or possibility of obtaining each credit based on local experience.
Table 8.1.1 gives examples of three types of rankings that have been used to start the
initial checklist. One ranking is a subjective ranking of ease of obtaining, the second
ranking is the percent of regional projects that have received the credit, and the third
ranking is a ranking that gives an initial estimate of viability ranked by the certification
levels in the LEED-NC rating system. The items in Table 8.1.1 are for illustrative purposes
only and do not represent the actual ease based on any scientific or region-specific
analyses. Prerequisites have been excluded from the list as they are required.
The ranked list used is subject to change readily as the demand for green products
changes and the knowledge or experience with green construction evolves in an area.
This ranked list is also partially based on projects adhering to earlier versions of LEED,
and subsequent versions may make certain credits more or less applicable for similar
projects in the future. Regardless, past experiences can still give a reasonable starting
point for initial estimates of LEED-NC certification feasibility.
The University of South Carolina (USC) has worked on many LEED registered
projects. One of the projects was unique in that it represented a proposed baseball
stadium, which was significantly different from the types of projects that the LEED-
NC 2.2 rating system was usually based on. With this project, it was not easy to readily
identify the sustainable opportunities as outlined in LEED-NC 2.2, but USC wanted to
explore the possibility of LEED certification. To deal with this, the project team first
developed a checklist from its current ranked list based on prior experience with other
projects. One month later, after some preliminary design was complete, the list was
revised based on further information and reviews of CIRs. Table 8.1.2 depicts the changes
in the credit checklist for these two periods in the early design stage for the baseball
stadium project. As the project proceeded beyond this early design phase, there were
fewer and fewer changes. Table 8.1.2 shows how a checklist can help initiate the process
even with a project for which there is much uncertainty as to the best sustainable route,
and for which there are few previous similar projects to use for initial estimates.

Project Methods and Scheduling

Project Methods and Phases
Project schedules and interactions differ depending on the type of project and the type
of construction process used. For example, some projects follow the more traditional
design-bid-build process, whereas others might have one design-build contract. Since
continuity and a systems approach are important for effective incorporation of sustainable
construction into projects, the different project delivery methods do impact the manner
in which these are handled. The method of interaction between the project participants