18 BUILDINGS 03.15
systems, analyzes water and energy use,
and provides an estimate of the current
LEED score. The outcome would include
an ENERGY STAR score, the services
required to meet indoor air quality prerequisites, and operating practices that
need to be revamped or updated.
Armed with the gap information,
owners can make an informed decision
about what they can achieve and then
write an RFP for the balance of the work.
A gap analysis can be done for about
10% of the consulting cost for the entire
certification project. Owners should
recoup that cost if they proceed with
certification because they will get more
out of the remaining 90%.
So the gap analysis should not be
based on a particular LEED level?
Correct. It should identify what it
Are there other factors that can
would take to reach various certification
targets. However, be prepared for some
unexpected results. Sometimes the gap
analysis reveals that a building has a
fundamental issue that makes it unable
to meet a LEED prerequisite for energy
or ventilation. In such cases, it is easy to
redirect efforts toward solving those is-
sues first, which are likely of the highest
value to the building and the owners.
undermine the owner’s value from
the certification process?
Sometimes the LEED-EBOM process
creates tension for facility managers. A
consultant may propose new ways of
running the facility, and the managers
may view that situation as a threat.
How can owners avoid such tension
between the facility staff and a
When they evaluate certification
consultants, owners should consider if
there is a good cultural fit between their
organization and the consultants.
You need a consultant who can work
with your facility managers, doesn’t
point fingers, and effectively collaborates with the team to stay focused on
what needs to change. An experienced
consultant can clear 90% of the certification hurdles through the application of
soft skills rather than through technical
Brad Pease is a director at Paladino and
Company, where he delivers sustainability concepts and technical design strategies to clients. He managed Paladino’s
role as technical editor and author of the
LEED v4 Reference Guides and currently
serves on USGBC’s 2015 LEED Integrative
Process Working Group.
continued from page 17
Estimating that up to a billion birds could be dying each year as a result of colliding with the glass exteriors of U.S.
buildings, ASTM International has proposed a new standard
to test materials for their likelihood to be detected by approaching birds.
The new guide, ASTM WK47853, will be used to provide a
quantified material threat factor score (MTFS) for bird repellence. Birds are given the perceived option of exiting a tunnel
either through a transparent control pane or a test pane. The
birds’ behaviors flying towards or avoiding the test pane
determines the score. The program is being reviewed by the
American Bird Conservancy.
ASTM expects that the new standard will provide users
from architects and manufacturers to consumers and building
managers a test to determine how well a chosen material
meets LEED requirements for Pilot Credit 55: Bird Collision
Deterrence. By satisfying the standard, building owners can
reap the benefits of natural lighting and thermal performance
while deterring bird collisions.
Not only can bird-friendly window glazes help with green
certification programs, but they may also become a code
requirement – laws requiring measures for commercial structures have recently or are expected to pass in several states.
New Standard for Bird-Friendly Glass
Proposed guideline would standardize collision deterrence testing