[Equest-users] existing buildings/alterations

[Kent Beason]

Bill, 

 

Okay...I would classify this as one of those nuances that Nick characterized
earlier.  It seems strange to me that this would only apply to the envelope,
but after all, it is only stipulated in Table G3.1 under Section 5f Building
Envelope.

 

To complicate the issue though, someone else's response was to use existing
HVAC systems.  Normally I would dismiss his response out of hand, but he was
a LEED reviewer at one time and is more 90.1 knowledgeable than me
currently.  I was about to send this message, sure that I would model
baseline per Appendix G, until I thought to look in Section 6.  Does Section
6.1.1.2 provide the adequate Exception to clarify that old HVAC systems must
be modeled in the baseline for a renovation/alteration project?  The term
"alteration" in the definitions appears to be applicable as an "addition" as
shown in this Exception of 6.1.1.2.  However, the verbiage "shall not be
required to comply with this standard" implies that it's optional.

 

Kent Beason

-------------------------

office - 903 581 2291

cell - 830 609 8904

 

From: Bishop, Bill [mailto:bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:55 PM
To: Kent Beason; 'Nick Caton'; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: RE: [Equest-users] existing buildings/alterations

 

Kent,

 

I didn't notice your message was only to me. I assumed it would be a matter
of seconds before others replied in the negative. The "existing conditions"
caveat applies only to the envelope. You must use the Appendix G baseline
systems and plants for the LEED Baseline, with the possible exception of the
central plant for DES systems as you mention.

 

~Bill

 

From: Kent Beason [mailto:kbeason at estesmcclure.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 2:49 PM
To: 'Nick Caton'; Bishop, Bill; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: RE: [Equest-users] existing buildings/alterations

 

Thanks for the feedback.    As I asked Bill offline, and I feel it goes
without saying, but never hurts to be thorough :-): this applies to the old
HVAC systems too, correct?  Obtaining the old HVAC system info could be a
daunting challenge unfortunately.

 

I've learned alot about nuances...  One area of this building is storefront
(essentially 100%) single pane glass around the whole perimeter!  

 

Kent Beason

-------------------------

office - 903 581 2291

cell - 830 609 8904

 

From: Nick Caton [mailto:ncaton at smithboucher.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:32 PM
To: Bishop, Bill; Kent Beason; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: RE: [Equest-users] existing buildings/alterations

 

Agreed.  Take note there are a couple nuances between what's written in 90.1
and what's required by the LEED reviewership.  I believe they draw a line in
the sand where if more than 50% of a project is "retrofit" vs. NC by square
footage, then rotations go away.

 

I just had 3 LEED projects wrap up at silver/gold where in the initial
submission I used thoroughly documented prescriptive baseline envelopes and
4 rotations.  The preliminary review commentary required changing the
envelopes to remove the rotations and match reality instead.  The previous
reality was (mostly) uninsulated grout filled block walls, single pane
windows without film treatments, and zero wall insulation =D!

 

As a net result, each of these projects jumped way up in unanticipated
modeling credits.  It was a good day.  

 

Outside the constraints of LEED, the closer your baseline models can reflect
existing realities, the better and more informative the results of your
models become for a retrofit analysis.

 

Regards,

 

~Nick 

 

cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB

 

NICK CATON, P.E.

SENIOR ENGINEER

 

Smith & Boucher Engineers

25501 west valley parkway, suite 200

olathe, ks 66061

direct 913.344.0036

fax 913.345.0617

www.smithboucher.com 

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Bishop,
Bill
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:17 PM
To: Kent Beason; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] existing buildings/alterations

 

Kent,

 

Yes, for existing buildings, use the wall & roof assemblies, glazing
properties etc. of the existing building for the Baseline values. Also, you
don't have to simulate in four orientations.

 

Regards,

Bill

 

William Bishop, PE, BEMP, BEAP, LEED AP | Pathfinder Engineers & Architects
LLP

Senior Energy Engineer

 

134 South Fitzhugh Street                 Rochester, NY 14608

T: (585) 325-6004 Ext. 114            F: (585) 325-6005

 <mailto:wbishop at pathfinder-ea.com> bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com
<http://www.pathfinder-ea.com/> www.pathfinder-ea.com

P   Sustainability - the forest AND the trees. P   

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Kent Beason
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:09 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [Equest-users] existing buildings/alterations

 

This question isn't eQuest specific, but deals with 90.1 interpretation.

 

For an existing building, with regards to shell alterations, G3.1.5-f says
that "the baseline building shall reflect existing conditions prior to any
revisions that are part of the scope of work being evaluated."  Is this
statement as far-reaching as I believe, indicating that U-values, SHGC etc,
listed in Tables 5.5 and Appendix A are ignored in a similar way as done in
the proposed, since the "baseline" in this case is a real design, rather
than a hypothetical baseline?

 

Kent Beason

Estes, McClure & Associates, Inc.

3608 West Way

Tyler, TX 75703

-------------------------

office - 903 581 2721

cell - 830 609 8904

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20130725/616afa1a/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1459 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20130725/616afa1a/attachment-0002.jpeg>