| Author | Post |
|---|
frobowop
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 18th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18th, 2008 02:14 pm |
|
After construction is a building management or leasing company allowed to charge a nominal fee for shower facilities or lockers to offset the cost of maintaining said facilities.
This is sometimes a barrier especially in larger properties where the size of the facilites becomes larger.
|
JayCSr
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18th, 2008 03:39 pm |
|
I do not see a problem. There is nothing in LEED that says it has to be free.
Under alternate transportation - public access, there is no requirement to provide free transportation.
Under alternate transportation - parking, there is no requirement to provide free parking.
imho (in my honest opinion)
Jay
|
mikedee
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 83 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: |   |
|
Posted: Sat Jul 19th, 2008 10:57 am |
|
Hmmm...but the idea is to encourage these modes of transportation. While it may not be specified in LEED, you may be defeating the purpose.
|
RealLifeLeed
Member
| Joined: | Thu Mar 27th, 2008 |
| Location: | Charleston, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 09:06 pm |
|
One thing to remember about LEED certifications (for everything except LEED-EB certifications) is that they certify the building only for the conditions under which they are submitted.
A parking lot can be designed to have preferred parking for low-emitting vehicles, but my understanding is that the USGBC won't revoke certification if a new owner comes in and takes away the preferred parking. Same goes with no-smoking policies... the LEED certification itself can't dictate that a new owner must comply with the LEED rules.
I'm not sure if there are any instances of a LEED building losing it's rating, or if there ever will be.
I agree with MikeDee in that charging for the showers seems to be directly against the intent of the credit, but I agree with Jay that it's probably allowable.
Joel - http://www.reallifeleed.com
|
secret
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 19th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 161 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 09:07 pm |
|
Core and Shell states that the lockers need to be free, however, NC does not state anything about charging. Neither credit says anything about charging for showers.....
But its seems inconsiderate to end users, bikers and non, because you want people to shower and clean themselves without much hassle after a bike commute!
I bike daily and if my employer wanted me to insert quarter here for shower, I'd get annoyed fast. Some days, I'll have to beg people for spare change so I can take a shower....what a hassle.
|
JayCSr
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 11:24 am |
|
Secret,
Granted in general I would not expect bike parking and showers to be chargable, but in a congested location like Baltimore/Washington where parking is a premium ($150 - $200 per month) I think that charging a 'nominal fee' for would sill make biking an attractive alternative.
I agree that I would not like to pay for showers, but then that is why I work outside the city; I don't like the idea of paying for parking either.
Jay
|
secret
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 19th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 161 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 01:22 pm |
|
JayCSr wrote: Secret,
Granted in general I would not expect bike parking and showers to be chargable, but in a congested location like Baltimore/Washington where parking is a premium ($150 - $200 per month) I think that charging a 'nominal fee' for would sill make biking an attractive alternative.
I agree that I would not like to pay for showers, but then that is why I work outside the city; I don't like the idea of paying for parking either.
Jay
I've lived in large US cities my entire life. I've always either biked, walked, bussed or trained it to work because I've never owned a car and am confident when I declare that I will never buy a car. With this being said....
I am currently working on a LEED project and my team has a few more LEED projects in various stages of design and LEED admin. Charging for showers has become a laffer amongst us. There is very little drama at work this week, we find charging sweaty commuters for a shower hilarious.
But all laughs aside, charging for showers is cheap and inconsiderate to all final building users. If the cost is so burdensome, the owner needs to pass that along to the renters in other creative ways. Or make up the costs in other places. High local parking costs are independant of showers and lockers, and it shouldn't be an issue in the discussion of shower costs. The goal is to lower the bar for commuters so that not driving to work becomes the best option. Supplying the lockers and showers is what the OP minimally needs to do to get the LEED credit but the BIG picture is, how can we get less cars on the road, which ultimately improves the commute experience for people that must drive?
|
RealLifeLeed
Member
| Joined: | Thu Mar 27th, 2008 |
| Location: | Charleston, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 03:27 pm |
|
One note - if it's a definite requirement in CS but not mentioned in NC, it's very probable that the review team will see it as a requirement on an NC project as well.
Joel
|
secret
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 19th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 161 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 03:15 pm |
|
I looked at all the ref guides again.
Core and Shell states that lockers need to be free. It also states it in NC and CI.
EB does not state the lockers have to be free and no where does it state in the four LEED cert's that showers have to be free.
|
Current time is 05:08 pm | |
|
