.4. uﬁxww ‘

4.5 «‘3‘,qu
{thing-MW:
. ‘
wnwwhhtnm .

~ v2
cuﬁrﬂ
. i

.3 w
9.3

~
3

.4t. \ If} .
I . V 2i 5,
. an an?! “2 a.
A . \11- S .
.x. s 5:3. a .L
~..... 2.332.: ~
afﬁrm. «#1. .9

”ms...

[A ,
$1358, u

7‘
x1:
\

R
s.
4H. ...

s: a?
. . z a
a. ..
r .. Hug?

543%.;
£ .

 

 

 

 

 

"fw _LIBRAFIY
: 002' Michigan State
University

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

IMPACT OF LEEDQ — NC PROJECTS ON CONSTRUCTORS
AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

presented by
Shilpi Mago

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

MS. degree in Construction Management

 

 

[WW

Major Professdy‘s Signature
I 0/57 /0 '2
' I

Date

MSU is an aﬁinnative-action, equal-opportunity employer

_ .-—-.--.-.-v—o-------------—-—-—.—--.-.—u-n-.-.-o---.--o—-.-.-.-..—

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

0 Eff 3 6 "9m

 

143009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:lClRC/DateDue.indd-p.1

 

IMPACT OF LEED®-NC PROJECTS ON CONSTRUCTORS AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

By

Shilpi Mago

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in the partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Construction Management

2007

ABSTRACT

IMPACT OF LEED®-NC PROJECTS ON CONSTRUCTORS
AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

By
Shilpi Mago

As sustainable construction enters mainstream and the LEED®-NC green building
rating system becomes synonymous with green buildings, the need to assess the impact of
this rating system on constructors’ practices is imperative. While owners and designers
have played a prominent role in pursuing LEED® projects, there is a strong need to deﬁne
the role of constructors’ and their early involvement in the green building process. This
research presents a comprehensive analysis of the impact of LEED®-NC credits on
constructors and construction management practices. In addition, a database-query
system was also developed as a tool to access these impacts by the constructors. Further,
the research method used, was mapped to develop a process model for undertaking a
similar impact assessment of green building programs on other construction sectors. The
research outputs were developed with the help of four case study projects and an
eighteen-member industry advisory group. These outputs would greatly assist

constructors as they navigate LEED®-NC projects.

 

I dedicate this thesis to my family, for their love, support and trust in all my
endeavors. Thank you, for being my Rock of Gibraltar, you all made it possible.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This endeavor is a result of hard work, support, encouragement and trust extended by
many people. First, an extremely special thanks to Dr. Matt Syal for his support and
encouragement that spans beyond this thesis, in shaping my growth as a person. Working
under him has inculcated in me the belief to work towards our goals and not depend on

the light to appear at the end of the tunnel.

I would like to thank Prof. Mrozowski and Dr. LaMore for all their input and guidance in
completing this research. I am deeply grateful to Dr. Maya Fischhoff for her help and
support in this research. I would like to gratefully acknowledge the special input received
from Mr. Grant Mendeljian, Mr. Jarrad Pitts and Mr. Gavin Gardi as they provided the
industry perspective and helped in reinforcing the research ﬁndings. I am also grateful to

other faculty members and staff for lending their support in this endeavor.

I would like to acknowledge my family, especially my mother Veena Mago, my father

Ashok Mago, my aunt Asha Vinayak, and my sister Roshi for all their support and love.

I would like to thank Gopu Pillai and for his encouragement when I started working on
this thesis. I would like to thank Douglas Moody, James Holden and George Berghom for
their advice and inputs. I am grateful to Yash Singh for sharing the rigors of research,
learning, and growing throughout the masters program. I would also want to thank Varun
Potbhare, Amanjeet Singh and Samarth Jain for their support and assistance. Finally, I

appreciate the effort and time extended by Kristin Elliott towards this research.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................ viii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................... ix
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview ............................................................................ 1
1.2 Research Need ..................................................................... 5
1.2 1 Need for Green Buildings .................................................. 5
1. 2. 2 Green Building Rating Tools- LEED® Green Building Rating
System .............................................................................. 7
1.2.3 Role of Constructors in the Green Building Movement. . . . 9
1.3 Research Goal and Objectives .................................................... 11
1.4 Research Scope and Limitations ................................................ 13
1.5 Research Methodology ........................................................... 14
1.5.1 Objective — 1 ................................................................. 14
1.5.2 Objective — 2 ................................................................. 20
1.5.3 Objective — 3 ................................................................. 21
1.6 Deliverables and Research Contribution ....................................... 22
1.7 Chapter summary ................................................................... 23
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2. 1 Introduction ........................................................................ 24
2.2 Sustainable Design and Construction .......................................... 25
2.2.1 Attributes of Green Buildings ............................................ 26
2.2.1.1 Energy Efﬁciency and Renewable Energy ..................... 26
2.2.1.2 Land and Water Resources ....................................... 27
2.2.1.3 Resource Conservation and Recycling ......................... 28
2.2.1.4 Indoor Environmental Quality ................................... 28
2.2.2 Green Buildin n5 Rating Systems .. .................................................... 29
2.2.2.1 LEED —NC Green Building Rating System ................. 30
2.2.2.2 Green Globes ...................................................... 30
2.3 Constructor’s Role in Green Building Projects ............................... 31
2.3.1 Construction Management Aspects of Green Buildings .............. 32
2. 3.2 Cost Aspects of Green Buildings ........................................ 37
2.4 Database Systems/ Query-Based Systems and Process Model .............. 40

CHAPTER THREE
PROJECT PHASE IMPACT MATRIX AND
LEED®-NC CREDIT IMPACT MATRIX

3.1 Overview ........................................................................ 42
3.2 Typical Construction Process ................................................... 43
3.3 LEED® - NC Green Building Rating System - Constructor’s Role ...... 48
3.4 Case Studies and Industry Advisory Group .............................. 50
3.4.1 Case Study Projects ........................................................ 50
3.4.1.1 Case Study Selection Process 51
3.4.1.2 Case Study Data Collection Process Phase-1 ............... 52
3.4.2 Industry Advisory Group ................................................. 53
3.4.2.1 Industry Advisory Group Selection Process .................. 53
3.5 Development of Project Phase Impact Matrix ............................... 54
3.5.1 Organization of Project Phase Impact Matrix ......................... 54
3.5.2 Project Phase Impact Matrix Example — Preconstruction Project 57
Management Matrix ...............................................................
3.5.3 Analysis Of Project Phase Impact Matrix ............................... 62
3.6 Development of LEED® — NC Credit Impact Matrix 64
3.6.1 Relationship between Project Phase Impact Matrix and LEED® - 64
NC Credit Impact Matrix .........................................................
3.6.2 LEED® — NC Credit Impact Matrix 66
3.6.2.1 Organization of LEED®—NC Credit Impact Matrix ......... 70

3.6.2.2 Process of Preliminary Analysis and Data Finalization... 70
3.6.2.3 Maj or Impact Credit — MR Credit -2: Construction Waste

Management ............................................................ 71
3.6.3 Moderate Impact Credit — ID Credits .................................... 74
3.7 Project Delivery Methods for Green Projects ................................. 79
3.7.1 Design Build ................................................................ 79
3.8 Chapter summary .................................................................. 80
CHAPTER FOUR
LEED®-NC IMPACT DATABASE QUERY APPLICATION
4. 1 Introduction ......................................................................... 82
4.2 Database Structure and Design .................................................. 82
4.2.1 Conceptual Database Design ............................................. 83
4.2.2 Database Physical Model .................................................. 86
4.2.3 User Interface 87
4.3 Illustrative example of Major and Moderate Impact Credit ................. 87
4.3.1 Major Impact Credit (MR Credit 2 - Construction Waste
Management) ....................................................................... 88
4.3.2 Moderate Impact Credit ID Credit 1- Innovation in Design ........... 95
4.4 Chapter Summary ................................................................. 102

vi

CHAPTER FIVE

PROCESS MODEL FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF GREEN BUILDING

PROGRAMS

5.1
5.2

5.3

Introduction ........................................................................
Process Steps for Impact Assessment of Green Building Programs .......
5.2.1 Review Literature ..........................................................
5.2.2 Project Phase Impact Assessment ........................................
5.2.3 Impact Assessment of Green Building Guidelines .....................
5.2.4 Impact Analysis Application Tool Development ......................
Application of the Process Model ..............................................
5.3.1 LEED-H: MR Credit 2 — Environmentally Preferable Products
5.3.1.1 STEP-1: Conduct Literature Review ............................
5.3.1.2 STEP-2: Project Phase Impact Assessment ....................
5.3.1.3 STEP-3: Impact Assessment of LEED®- H Requirements...
5.3.1.4 STEP-4: Development of Impact Analysis Application

Tool for LEED®- H ...................................................
5.4 Chapter Summary ..................................................................
CHAPTER SIX
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Overview ............................................................................
6.2 Summary of Research Objectives achieved ...................................
6.2.1 Objective 1 ...................................................................
6.2.2 Objective 2 ...................................................................
6.2.3 Objective 3 ...................................................................
6.3 Conclusions and Inferences ......................................................
6.3.1 Role of Constructor’s in LEED® - NC Projects ........................
6.4 Areas of Future Research .........................................................
6.5 Summary ............................................................................
APPENDICES ..........................................................................................................
REFERENCES .........................................................................................................

vii

103
103
107
108
111
114
115
116
116
117
120

122
122

123
124
124
126
128
128
131
134
135

136

161

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1: Financial Beneﬁts of Green Buildings Cost per sq. ft. (Kats 2003). . .. 6
Table 3.1: Major Impact Credits achieved/ attempted by case study projects. . 67
Table 3.2: Project Phase Impact Matrix — Preconstruction Phase .................... 57
Table 5.1: Project Phase Impact Assessment ........................................... 119
Table 5.2: Example LEED®— H, MR Credit 2 - Impact Assessment of Green 121

Building Guidelines Impact Level ...

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Incorporation of sustainability aspects in the traditional construction

approach ........................................................................................ 3
Figure 1.2: Likely Maturation Curve for Sustainable Buildings ........................ 4
Figure 1.3: Research Methodology .......................................................... 14
Figure 2.1: Literature Categories Reviewed ................................................ 24
Figure 3.1: Components of Existing Research Knowledge .............................. 42
Figure 3.2: Typical lifecycle of a building project (Syal 2006) ......................... 43
Figure 3.3: Constructor’s Involvement in Different Project Delivery Methods 44
(adapted from Sweet 2004 and Syal 2006) ................................................
Figure 3.4: Structure of Project Phase Matrix ............................................. 55
Figure 3.5: Project phases and sub phases used in Project Phase Impact Matrix. . .. 56
Figure 3.6: Development Of CM functions from Project Phases ........................ 65
Figure 3.7: Categorization of LEED®- NC Credits as Major, Moderate and Some 66
impacts ..........................................................................................
Figure 3.8: Major Impact LEED®- NC Credits ........................................... 69
Figure 3.9: Structure of LEED®- NC Credit Impact Matrix ............................. 70
Figure 3.10: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost — Slide 1 .......................... 71
Figure 3.11: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost — Slide 2 .......................... 72
Figure 3.12: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost — Slide 3 .......................... 72
Figure 3.13: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost — Slide 4 .......................... 73
Figure 3.10: Exemplary Performance LEED®- NC Credits ............................. 75

ix

Figure 3.11: Successful Attempt for the Innovation and Design credit ............... 76

Figure 3.12: Unsuccessful attempt for the Innovation and Design credit ............. 77
Figure 3.13: Constructor’s Role in achieving Innovation and Design Credits. . . . . 78
Figure 3.14: Constructor’s Role in Design Build delivery method ..................... 80
Figure 4.1: Entity Relationship Diagram LEED®- NC Impact Database .............. 85
Figure 4.2: Query Mechanism for Retrieving Estimation Impacts for LEED®- NC 86
Figure 4.3: Main database window .......................................................... 89
Figure 4.4: MR Credit 2 - Construction Waste Management — CM Functions ....... 90
Figure 4.5: MR Credit 2 - Project Administration and Documentation

Discussion Points and Examples ............................................................ 92
Figure 4.6: MR Credit 2 - Command buttons for linked documents ................... 93
Figure 4.7: MR Credit 2 — Linked documents open as PDF documents ............... 94
Figure 4.8: Main database window .......................................................... 96
Figure 4.9: ID Credit-1 —- Innovation and Design —— Discussion Points and 97

Examples .......................................................................................

Figure 4.10: 11) Credit -1 — Linked documents from the main 1D Credit window... 98

Figure 4.11: 1D Credit-1 — Innovation and Design — second discussion points ...... 99
Figure 4.12: Second discussion points linked from the main ID credit window. . 99
Figure 4.13: ID Credit-1 — Innovation and Design — ﬁrst example .................... 100
Figure 4.14: First example linked from the main ID credit window ................... 100
Figure 4.15: ID Credit-1 — Innovation and Design — second example ................. 101
Figure 4.16: First example linked from the main ID credit window ................... 101

Figure 5.1: Process Model for Impact Assessment of Green Building

Guidelines.............. ............................................................................................... 104
Figure 5.2: Green Building Impact Assessment Process ................................. 107
Figure 5.3: Literature Review Sections .................................................... 108
Figure 5.4: Project Phase Impact Assessment ............................................ 110
Figure 5.5: Impact Assessment of Green Building Guidelines ......................... 113
Figure 5.6: Impact Analysis Development Tool .......................................... 115
Figure 5.7: Literature Review Components for LEED®- H Illustration ............... 117
Figure 5.8: Project phases and sub phases for LEED®-H Illustration .................. 118

xi

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview

Sustainable development has long been recognized as the next step that
humankind should take in order to recuperate from the aftermath of the industrial
revolution (Gottﬁied 2000). Events such as the Stockholm Declaration, the Brundtland
Report, and the Rio Summit have brought nations together to address humankind’s
increasingly negative impacts on the environment. According to some studies,
construction industry is one of the largest contributors Of these negative impacts (CICA
2002)

Within the broader perspective of sustainable development, the construction
industry’s effort to utilize natural resources efﬁciently and mitigate the harmful effects Of
buildings and construction activities on the environment is termed sustainable
construction (Gottﬁied 2000, CICA 2002). Resource efﬁciency, in terms of green
buildings, refers to high levels Of energy and water efﬁciency, appropriate use Of land
resources, use of environmentally friendly materials, and minimization of life-cycle
effects of building’s design and Operation on the environment (Kibert 2005). The need for
sustainable construction has surfaced in the last 15 years, with a Signiﬁcant thrust in the
last decade. One of the drivers behind this thrust is the realization of unprecedented
energy consumption patterns of buildings (Mogge 2004). This realization has steered the
interest of owners and designers towards sustainable design and construction practices.
For instance, buildings in the United States consume one third of all primary energy

produced and close to two thirds of electricity produced (V anegas and Pearce 1997).

Globally, buildings are responsible for over 10% of the world’s freshwater withdrawals,
25% of its wood harvest, and 40% of material and energy ﬂows (Kibert 2005). In
addition, the construction industry generates 8-20% of the total municipal solid waste
(Fisk 2000, Augenbroe et. a1 1998). According to Kibert (2005), 30% of all new and
renovated buildings in the US. experience poor indoor environmental quality due to
noxious emissions, off gassing from evaporation of harmful substances present in
building materials, and pathogens resulting in low productivity which cause an annual
loss Of $60 billion. Thus, buildings have a signiﬁcant negative impact on the environment
and the health of their occupants.

Green buildings help to minimize this negative impact on the environment, and
improve occupant health, by reducing or eliminating the air borne contaminants and
improving the indoor air quality. In order to address the environmental impacts of
buildings and construction activities, several researchers have suggested the inclusion of
sustainability goals in construction project objectives (Houvila and Koskela 1998). This
requires superimposition Of sustainable concerns: minimization of environmental
degradation, minimization of resource depletion, and creation of a healthy built
environment, over the typical components of time, cost, quality, and safety as illustrated
in Figure 1.1. Inclusion of sustainability as an integral goal in a construction project also
brings forth the need to reconsider how the existing practices in the design and
construction industry best align with this goal. In addition, the shift to incorporate
sustainable practices into typical design and construction processes requires a redeﬁnition
Of the existing role of project participants to effectively contribute in sustainable project

objectives.

An important characteristic of sustainable projects is that they lend themselves to
a multidisciplinary and integrated team effort rather than a typical linear design and
construction process (Gottfried 2000). This integrated approach requires early
involvement and greater participation of different project members in order to better

utilize their technical expertise and knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

. I
0‘... Minimal natural resource ..‘0.
: consumption, de letion and I
.... degradat on ..o.
......IIIIIIIIIII-IITI..
o”...
9’ '0
o’ '0.
O. O
I Safety i’. ’3' Quality I
.v . - I I I I I n . .
.‘IIIIIIII... .. o. “‘ ...
c“ Minimal .... ° . ATTRIBUTES or . ..“ Minimal I 0..
'. waste generation : o T|ME A CONSTRUCTIONI COST . envirorgtmenctla :
0,. and accumulation .9 . PROJECT . e. mpa an ,
~.......,..--‘ 0, c 0.. degradation ...

 

.0
Minimum 0, .0. Participant
Disputes .0. ..’ satisfaction
0 o
O
O

O
O
O O

p ‘ ' ' I Contextual Satisfaction . ' ' ' ' o
. of Human Needs and :
‘0 Aspirations ,o‘

 

 

 

L

Figure 1.1: Incorporation of sustainability aspects in the traditional construction approach
(modiﬁed from Houvila and Koskela 1998 and Syal 2006)

The green building movement in the United States has encouraged the creation Of
green building rating systems. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

(LEED®) Green Building Rating System, developed by United States Green Building

Council (USGBC) is one of the most widely accepted rating systems. The design and
construction industry has gradually accepted the LEED® rating system in mainstream
practice as evidenced through growth of LEED®-New Construction (NC) certiﬁed
projects over the past few years (LEED 2005). The increase in LEED®-NC certiﬁed
projects represents a steady and growing interest in green buildings. Mogge (2004)
developed an evolution curve for green building design and construction under 5 phases
of research, development, innovation, maturation and normative use as shown in Figure
1.2. This evolution curve is based on the assumption that growth in green building
projects has doubled every year since 2000 and is continuing at this rate. With such a
growth rate, the likely maturation time for the green building movement would occur
around 2015; beyond which, green buildings will become normative practice. Based on
this evolution curve, Mogge (2004) identiﬁed the current state Of green building design

and construction to be between development and innovation phases.

2015 Mid Point

Normative Use
Current Research

Maturation Use

Innovators Use

Development

 

 

 

 

Research

 

1 990 2000 2010 2020

Figure 1.2: Likely Maturation Curve for Sustainable Buildings (Mogge 2004)

1.2 Research Need

The preceding sections focused on the growth of sustainable construction
practices and green buildings in the last few years and the pivotal role of the LEED®
green building rating system in this growth. Increase in LEED® certiﬁed buildings
represents a growing demand for green buildings in the design and the construction
industry. In the green building movement, the constructors were initially slow in
becoming a part of this movement (Riley et. a1. 2004, Syal 2005, GVRD 2004). This is
undergoing a change, however, and constructors are making the effort to become a part of
this initiative. The following sections discuss the research intent with focus on need for
green buildings, the green building rating tools with focus on LEED®-NC and a

constructor’s role in the green building movement.

1.2.1 Need for Green Buildings

The green building movement accelerated after the 1970’s energy crisis. In the early
903, with growth in environmental concerns about issues such as ozone depletion, global
climate change, and dependence on fossil fuels, the interest in green buildings received
great attention (Kibert 2005). Moreover, the impact of buildings on the environment
indicates the short-term planning efforts, which fail to take into account the lifecycle
performance of buildings. A gradual Shift towards an efﬁcient utilization of natural
resources is beginning to appear, however, evident from the construction sector’s effort in
pursuit of sustainability (CICA 2002). This Shift is also an acknowledgement of beneﬁts
related to green building design and construction practices. Various cost studies have

attempted to quantify these beneﬁts in terms Of cost savings and have proved

instrumental in encouraging owners to pursue green projects. In addition, designers and
owners are readily recognizing the beneﬁts of green buildings such as healthier
workplaces, reduction in life cycle costs, increased asset values, and reduced energy
consumption (Needy et. a1. 2004).

The cost studies have identiﬁed increases in worker productivity and savings in
operational cost due to decreased energy consumption as two primary beneﬁts of green
buildings. As shown in Table 1.1. Kats et a1. (2003) concluded that for a typical green
ofﬁce building, the monetary beneﬁt incurred over 20 years will be in the range of $
49.85 - S 66.25 per sq. ft. The study included savings due to energy, lower emissions,
water, operations and maintenance, and productivity and health beneﬁts, while the extra

cost of making the building green was deducted from the savings.

Table 1.1: Financial Beneﬁts of Green Buildings, Cost per sq. ft. (Kats 2003)

 

Category 20-year Net Present

Energy Savings $ 5.79

Emission Savings $ 1.18

Water Savings $ 0.51

Operations and Maintenance $ 8.47

Productivity and Health beneﬁts $ 36.90 - $ 55.30
Subtotal S 52.85 - $ 71.30

Green Cost Premium (-$ 3.00 to -$ 5.00)
Total 20- year beneﬁt 8 49.85 - S 66.25

 

 

 

Kats et a1. (2003) also concluded that the employee costs in a typical commercial
building are approximately 89 percent of the total building costs and increases in worker
productivity have a signiﬁcant impact on the owner’s savings. The study also stated that

an increase in worker productivity of 1 percent translates to an annual savings of $600 -

$700 per employee, or $3/sq.ft. of the area. Moreover, the overall cost savings from green
buildings vary from $49.85 to $66.25 per square foot, which is over 10 times the
additional cost associated with green buildings. In addition, maintenance and energy
savings are other sections of potential cost savings in green buildings. Similarly, Green
Building Alliance (GBA) conducted a study in 2003 on productivity beneﬁts observed by
Herman Miller, a furniture manufacturer, in their new green ofﬁce building. The green
Ofﬁce building accrued savings worth $6 million over a lease of 7 years, with a
breakdown of 33% in building costs, 41% in Operating costs, and 66% in churn-related
costs (GBA 2003).

These studies have given a deﬁnitive push towards recognition of green building
beneﬁts, by owners and designers, which is evident in the increasing number of green
buildings. Concurrent with the acceptance of green buildings has been the emergence of
green building rating systems, which exist to quantify the extent of sustainable/ green
features incorporated in these buildings. The next section focuses on green building

rating tools available and discusses in detail the LEED® Green Building Rating System.

1.2.2 Green Building Rating Tools - LEED®-NC Green Building Rating System

With growth in green buildings, has emerged the need to measure and assess their
performance, with the help of green building rating systems. These rating systems serve
two functions; of promoting high performance buildings, and creating the demand for
sustainable construction (U SGBC 2006). One of the most signiﬁcant indicators of the
shift towards green design and construction practices in the past few years is the growing

number of LEED®-NC certiﬁed buildings in the United States (U SGBC 2006).

There are other green building assessment systems used worldwide, such as
Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM),
Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efﬁciency (CASBEE),
Green GlobesTM US, and Green Building (GB) Tool. BREEAM, a primary system used
in the United Kingdom, was one of the ﬁrst sustainable building assessment tools used
worldwide. The Japanese Sustainable Building Consortium developed Comprehensive
Assessment System for Building Environmental Efﬁciency (CASBEE) in 1990, primarily
for application to the Japanese construction industry (Kibert 2005, Fowler and Rauch
2006). Green Globes US, is an assessment tool developed by the Green Building
Initiative and used in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. It is an online
tool and consists of questionnaires that help the project team in assessing the building
systems and practices used in the project. GBTool software was developed in Canada, as
a part of an international effort by the Green Building Challenge. The GBTool software
assesses the estimated performance of a building (GBTool 2007).

The LEED® rating system is widely accepted in United States and is being
introduced in countries such as China, India, and Canada (LEED 2005). The eminence of
the LEED® rating system is evident in its growth over the years, since 1998. As of
November 2006, there are 623 LEED®-NC certiﬁed projects and 4,617 LEED®-NC
registered projects. In addition, the annual market for green building products and
services has grown to $7 billion in 2006 and the number of buildings aiming for LEED®
certiﬁcation has consistently increased in the last 9 years (Kibert 2005 and USGBC

2006)

Moreover, these increasing numbers signify the owners’ demand tO pursue
sustainable buildings and achieve LEED® certiﬁcation. According to USGBC, federal,
state, and local governments own 46 percent of LEED® certiﬁed projects and 56 local
governments have adopted the LEED® rating system into their building standards
(U SGBC 2006). The General Services Administration (GSA) submitted a report to the
Chairman of Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, in September
2006, stating that “...the US Green Building Council’s LEED®-NC rating system
continues to be the most appropriate and credible sustainable building rating system
available for evaluation of GSA projects” (Fowler and Rauch 2006). Kibert (2005)
presented a hypothesis, that if close to 1% of all commercial and institutional buildings
were designed according to LEED® standards in 2003, and with an expected increase
every year, by 2008 the majority of buildings in the United States may be LEED®
certiﬁed and the LEED® rating system may become an industry standard in the coming

years.

1.2.3 Role of Constructors in the Green Building Movement

Owners, both public and private, along with designers are taking the lead in
pursuing sustainable design and construction practices. The designers have been a ‘
dominant part of the green building movement since the very beginning, as they are the
creators of the initial idea for the built environment (Riley et. al. 2003). As both the
source (designer) and the end user (owner) are readily adopting sustainable design
practices, however, it becomes imperative for the process implementer (constructor) to

become an active team member in successfully implementing green building projects

(Syal 2005). A constructor can provide input on aspects such as material selection,
system performance, decreasing construction waste, and improving indoor air quality. In
addition, the constructor can also provide input on streamlining construction methods,
value engineering methods, and constructability reviews in order to achieve the green
project goals. There is a need to deﬁne a broader role of constructors and their early
involvement in the green building process (Riley et. al. 2003, Mogge 2004, Samaras
2004). As the LEED rating system makes inroads into the mainstream design and
construction industry, the constructors need to contribute towards a project’s green
Objectives by understanding LEED and their role in executing green buildings, through
early involvement and greater participation during the major project phases (Syal 2005).
The key here is to move from the traditional linear construction process to a more
integrated, cyclic system.

The incorporation of a constructor as an integral team member in a green building
process comprehends the concept of sustainable development in the true sense as it
imbibes an integrated design and construction approach (Samaras 2004). Early
collaboration of design and construction teams, in a green building project, help to
streamline and optimize the design and construction process by sharing knowledge
between cross-functional teams (Houvila and Koskela 1998). Through their early
involvement in a project, the construction teams can provide technical expertise to
streamline the design and construction process Of green buildings (Riley et. a1. 2004,
Pulaski et. a1. 2003). Moreover, as Samaras (2004) states that with greater momentum in
the sustainability movement in the construction industry, the need to design and construct

in harmony with the environment will not be an isolated component, but instead become

10

part of common practice. With improvement in technology, the learning curve of
sustainable construction practices for constructors will tend to stabilize in aspects such as
increased efficiency of building systems, procurement and supply chain operations,
material and resource recovery methods, and life-cycle asset values.

The above noted discussion underscores the growth Of green buildings and the
resultant acceptance of the LEED®-NC rating system by owners and designers. As an
essential part of a project team, the constructors can be a vital source of input in
successfully executing green buildings. This momentum Of the green building movement
reinforces the need and timeliness for this research that attempts to identify the impact of
green buildings on a constructor’s role with the LEED®-NC Rating System as a

reference.

1.3 Research Goal and Objectives

The overall goal of this research is to analyze the role of constructors in LEED® projects.
This goal was achieved by analyzing the impacts of these projects on constructors’
activities and construction management practices. The following objectives were

accomplished to achieve the research goal.

1. Identijjz and analyze the impact of LEED®-NC requirements on constructors and
construction management practices.
Step 1: Familiarize with LEED® - NC V 2.2 and review existing literature to

understand and assimilate the current research in sustainable design and construction.

11

Step 2: Develop the Project Phase Impact Matrix to map a constructor’s role in green
buildings during various project phases.

Step 3: Conduct case studies through site visits and industry input.

Step 4: Develop the LEED® - NC Credit Impact Matrix to map the impact Of LEED®-
NC credits on constructor’s activities/ practices.

Step 5: Based on a constructor’s role in different project delivery methods, identify
responsibilities in a LEED® project.

Step 6: Conduct an Industry Advisory Group (IAG) work session to obtain feedback

on the outputs developed in steps 4 and 5.

Develop the database-query system to assist the constructors in successfully
navigating LEED® - NC rating system.

Step 7: Review literature on database systems to understand their architecture and
working mechanism.

Step 8: Identify the entities (tables, forms and queries) required for developing the
database, create the entity relationship diagram, and develop the rules of data
retrieval, based on the LEED® - NC Credit Impact Matrix.

Step 9: Develop the database, based on information synthesized in Objective 1.

Step 10: Obtain feedback from the IAG.

Based on the methodology followed in this research, develop a process model for
investigating a constructor ’s role in other green buildings programs such as LEED-

Homes, LEED - Commercial Interiors, etc.

12

Step — 11: Compile the comprehensive methodology steps, followed in objectives 1
and 2.

Step — 12: Develop a process model to assess the impact of a green building program
on a constructor’s activities.

Step — 13: Illustrate the application Of the process model.

1.4 Research Scope and Limitations

1.

The focus of this research is on LEED®-NC certiﬁed or registered commercial
buildings.

In this research, the term constructor refers to General COntractorS and Construction
Managers.

One case study project is used in detail due to availability of data from construction
professionals and owners wishing to share project information and ease of
accessibility. Other case study projects are used to a varied extent due to their
location, stages of these projects and availability of data. Information from these
projects was solicited by the members of the Industry Advisory Group.

This research uses the terms “sustainable” and “green” synonymously and
interchangeably.

Project speciﬁc characteristics such as size, type and level of LEED®-NC rating may
result in varied impact on constructors’ activities.

A formal interview process was not used for this research. Instead the interviews were

held as informal and open ended discussions.

13

1.5 Research Methodology
The last section provided an overview of the research methodology as it relates to
the objectives and the work steps undertaken to achieve them. These steps are discussed

in detail in the following sections and Figure 1.3 illustrates the research methodology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

graphically.
Define Research _ ,
, ' I. Develop Project - - - — _ Conduct
Formulate Research Phase Impact Matrix Case Studies
Goals and objectives ' i l
' I
- 1 Develop LEED-NC _ _ _ . j _______ _:
Conduct 1 1 Credit Impact Matrix
Literature Review
Objective 2
I I _| Develop LEED-NC Impact
Identify constructors' role 1 Database-Query system
in different contractual ,
arrangements for green
projects 3 ,
L Develop Process Model for
Impact assessment of
Present LEED-NC Credit 1 Green Buildirjg Programs
Impact Matrix to Industry 4
Advrsory Group Illustrate the application
of Process Model
Objective 3

 

 

 

Figure 1.3: Research Methodology

1.5.1 Objective — 1

Identify and analyze the impact of LEED® - NC requirements on construction
management practices.

Step 1: Familiarize with LEED® - NC V 2.2 and review existing literature to understand

and assimilate the current research in sustainable design and construction.

14

The ﬁrst step of this research entailed developing a detailed understanding of the
LEED® - NC V2.2 rating system, as it was imperative to understand the intents and
strategies of LEED® - NC credits to identify possible responsibilities of a constructor in a
green building process. For instance, some of the credits that require a constructor’s
signiﬁcant involvement in a green building process were identiﬁed in this step, such as
the intent of Energy and Atmosphere (EA) and Material Resources (MR) category, which
by virtue of their requirements, reveal signiﬁcant opportunities to involve constructors.

The literature review covered the following categories:
Category l—A: Sustainable Design and Construction
0 Attributes of green buildings
0 Green building rating system
' LEED®-NC green building rating system
I Green Globes
Category l-B: Constructor’s Role in Green Buildings

0 Construction management aspects of green buildings

0 Cost aspects of green buildings
Category 2: Database / Query systems, Process-Modeling tools

Two main categories of literature were reviewed for this research. Category 1 is
comprised of two sub categories; category 1A- sustainable design and construction and
category 1-B- constructor’s role in a green building process. Both these sub categories
have further divisions as mentioned in the beginning of this section. The second category

focuses on the database/query systems and process models. Category 1 assisted in

15

achieving the ﬁrst research objective, while Category 2 provided the necessary
background to achieve the second and third research objective.

Category l-A focused on green building attributes and green building rating
systems. The ﬁrst section of Category l-A includes a review of green building attributes,
namely; energy efﬁciency and renewable energy, land and water resources, resource
conservation and recycling, and indoor environmental quality (V anegas and Pearce 1997,
Augenbroe et. a1. 1997, Kibert 2005). These attributes form the ﬁve categories of LEED -
NC rating system and are discussed in Chapter 3. The second section of Category l-A
discusses green building rating systems, with focus on the LEED® - NC green building
rating system, and a short discussion on Green Globes as the other rating system used in
the United States. Category I-B reviewed the constructor’s role in green buildings, in
relation with construction management and cost aspects of green buildings. This section
discusses the Opportunities in a green building process, in which a constructor can make a
signiﬁcant contribution. It also highlights the importance of a constructor’s involvement
in optimizing and streamlining the green building process and offsetting the high initial
cost associated with green buildings. The construction management aspect of green
buildings discusses existing and ongoing research, which aligns with some of the
assertions put forward by this research. One such initiative is being pursued at Penn State
University, with focus on improving the delivery process of green buildings. This
research initiative has identiﬁed different aspects, methods, and means of how green

building project delivery system can enhance the sustainability pursuits of a project.

16

Step 2: Develop the Project Phase Impact Matrix to map a constructor ’s role in green
buildings during various project phases.

Based on the literature reviewed in step 1, the Project Phase Impact Matrix was
developed. This matrix consists of constructors’ responsibilities in a LEED® - NC project,
categorized under different project phases. The Project Phase Impact Matrix is the
synthesis of the literature reviewed in the form of a preliminary analysis of this research.
The Project Phase Impact Matrix identiﬁed a constructor’s contribution in achieving
LEED® - NC credits, during different project phases. It formed the basis for the LEED® -
NC Credit Impact Matrix as the Construction Management (CM) ﬁrnctions, used to
develop the structure of the LEED® - NC Credit Impact Matrix were identiﬁed from the
Project Phase Impact Matrix and assisted in developing the structure for conducting case

studies.

Step 3: Conduct case studies through site visits and industry input.

In this step, four case study projects were studied. These case studies were reviewed
under the research initiative at Michigan State University, supported by the William A.
Klinger Memorial Research Award, AGC Education and Research Foundation and the
Environment Research Initiative (ERI), Michigan State University. The researcher
acknowledges the funding for this project from the William A. Klinger Memorial
Research Award, AGC Education and Research Foundation and the Environment
Research Initiative, Michigan State University. In addition, the valuable role of the

industry advisory group and the project teams of the four case study projects is gratefully

l7

acknowledged. AS this research was conducted under this research initiative, the same
case study projects were used and all projects had the following characteristics:

' The projects are commercial buildings that are either LEED® certiﬁed or
registered for certiﬁcation.

I The project team was willing to share project information.

I The focus group in the case study project teams consisted of — estimators, cost
engineers, project engineers / superintendents, project managers, facility
managers and LEED® coordinators ( from constructors team).

An industry advisory group (IAG) was formed, comprised of design and
construction personnel. The role of IAG was signiﬁcant in providing an industry
perspective to the research ﬁndings and their experience with LEED® projects through
examples and lessons learned.

The case studies were conducted as informal discussions with the project planning
and execution team (constructor’s team). The informal discussion facilitated Sharing of
lessons learned by the construction team. The CM functions identiﬁed from the project
phase impact matrix were used as a format to collect information from the case study
projects. This information was analyzed and incorporated in the LEED®-NC Credit
Impact Matrix. A detailed discussion of the case study selection process is presented in

Chapter 3.

Step 4: Develop the LEED —NC Credit Impact Matrix to map the impact of LEED®-NC

credits on constructor ’s activities/ practices.

18

After conducting the case studies, the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix was
developed. This matrix was developed from three sources; the Project Phase Impact
matrix, case study data and analysis, and the literature reviewed. The intention of
developing this matrix was to address the impact of all LEED®-NC credits on the
constructor’s processes. The organization of this matrix consists of two components;
LEED®-NC categories and credits and CM functions identiﬁed from the Project Phase
Impact Matrix. In the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix, the impact of each credit was
identiﬁed on six CM functions as constructor’s responsibilities. In Chapter 3, a detailed

discussion of the development of this matrix and an example is presented.

Step 5: Based on a constructor ’s role in different project delivery methods, identiﬁ/
responsibilities in a LEED® project.

In this step, a constructor’s role in green building projects was identiﬁed for
different project delivery methods. These contractual relationship maps were developed
from the literature reviewed and the impacts identiﬁed in the LEED®-NC credit impact
matrix.

Step 6: Conduct an Industry Advisory Group (IAG) work session, to obtain feedback on
the outputs developed in steps 4 and 5.

In this step, the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix was presented to the IAG. The
IAG members provided input and feedback in the form of examples based on their
experience and the current industry practices in green buildings, which was incorporated
in the matrix. Due to the diversity in the composition of IAG, members from the design

and construction industry contributed their knowledge, which rendered the feedback

19

coherent. Details of the IAG are included in Chapter 3 and excerpts from the comments

received on the matrix are included in Appendix E.

1.5.2 Objective - 2
Develop the database-query system application to assist the constructors in navigating the

LEED®-NC rating system and successfully executing LEED® projects.

Step - 7: Conduct literature review of database systems to understand their architecture
and working mechanism.

In this step, literature pertaining to database - query systems was reviewed. The
intention of this step was to understand the construct, working mechanism, architecture,

and the components required to create database - query systems.

Step — 8: Identiﬁz the entities (tables, forms and queries) required to develop the
database, to create the entity relationship diagram, and to develop the rules of data
retrieval, based on the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix.

This step involved the identiﬁcation of type of database to be developed, database
entities such as tables, forms and queries required, and the relationship between these
database entities. In addition, from the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix, three
components namely; i) LEED®-NC categories and credits, ii) CM functions, and iii) the
impacts identiﬁed were included in the database. Based on the LEED®-NC Credit Impact
Matrix, the queries required for sorting and retrieving the impacts were formulated. The

database design was based on its potential users from the construction team, such as

20

project managers, estimators, ﬁeld engineers, and the CM ﬁmctions helped in

categorizing the impacts for easy access.

Step — 9: Present the database to Industry Advisory Group and obtain feedback and
input.
After developing the database, it was presented to the IAG for input and feedback

on aspects such as user interface and ease of accessing the information.

1.5.3 Objective — 3
Based on the methodology followed in this research, develop a process model for
similar research for investigating a constructor’s role in other green buildings programs,

such as LEED®- H, CI, etc.

Step — 10: Compile the comprehensive methodology steps, based on objectives one and
two.

In this step, the detailed research methodology steps for Objective 1 and 2 were
compiled to map the broad phases for assessing the impact of LEED®-NC projects on

construction management practices.

Step — 11: Develop a typical process model for assessing the impact of a green building

program on constructors’ activities.

21

Based on the process map developed above, a process model was developed to
identify a constructor’s role in implementing a green project for other sustainability

programs. In the process model developed, detailed process tasks were outlined.

Step — 12: Illustrate the application of the green building program Impact Assessment on
constructors’ activities process model.

This step was comprised of illustrating the application of the process model. For this
illustration, LEED®- Homes (LEED®-H) was taken as the reference green building rating
system and the impact was assessed on a homebuilder’s role in compliance with this

rating system.

1.6 Deliverables/ Research Contribution
This research attempts to identify the impact of LEED®-NC projects on
construction management practices with focus on a constructor’s role in a green building
process. The following research deliverables were developed and are discussed in the
subsequent chapters:
' Documentation of the constructor’s responsibilities in a LEED®-NC project
for different project phases.
' Documentation of constructor’s role in achieving the LEED®-NC credits.
I Development of a database/query system that deﬁnes the constructor’s
responsibilities, based on LEED®-NC requirements, for the ﬁve CM ﬁmctions

identiﬁed in this research.

22

' Development of a detailed process model to identify the impact of other green
building rating systems on the constructor’s activities, which could be

employed by other researchers.

1.7 Summary

In the wake Of sustainable construction entering mainstream practice, and the
LEED®-NC green building rating system becoming synonymous with green buildings,
the need to assess the impact of this system on the constructor’s practices is imperative.
This underscores the research intent, which attempts to analyze a constructor’s role in
implementing LEED®-NC projects. This chapter provides an overview of the research

goals, Objectives, intent, and a detailed discussion of the research methodology used.

23

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The literature reviewed for this research builds from two main categories, and the
ﬁrst category is further divided into two sub categories. Category 1 establishes the
existing knowledge of sustainable design and construction, with focus on the
constructors’ role in green buildings. Category 2 focuses on the database/query-based
systems and process modeling concepts. The breakdown of the focus areas of each

literature category is shown in Figure 2.1.

 

Category l-A : Sustainable Design and Construction

 

I Green Building Attributes
I Green Building Rating Systems
> LEED®-NC Green Building Rating System

> Green Globes

 

Category l-B : Constructor’s Role in Green Building Process

 

I Construction Management Aspects Of Green Buildings

I Cost Aspects of Green Buildings

 

Category 2 : Database/Query Systems and Process Models

 

 

 

Figure 2.1: Literature Categories Reviewed

24

The existing body of literature pertaining to green buildings can be broadly
categorized under three main categories: green building attributes, cost impacts of green
buildings, beneﬁts of green buildings and the green building rating systems. As this
research centers on the constructor’s role in LEED®-NC projects, it was imperative to
gain an understanding of this rating system and the attributes of green buildings. The
constructor’s role in green buildings is discussed under two sub categories of construction
management and cost aspects of green buildings. The second category of the literature
reviewed deals with database/ query-based and process modeling systems that assisted in
the design of the database/ query-based tool for constructors to effectively contribute in

LEED® projects.

2.2 Sustainable Design and Construction

Sustainable construction represents the efforts of the construction industry in
reducing the dependence of the built environment on natural resources and identifying
opportunities, strategies and technologies to contribute towards sustainable development
(Kibert 2005, Vanegas and Pearce 1997). As Samaras (2004) notes, the construction
industry is a major participant in the sustainability movement as it is the foremost
contributor to detrimental impacts on the environment. According to Kibert (2005), in the
United States production and manufacturing of building components, and the
construction activities themselves, consmne more than 6 billion tons of basic materials
annually. In addition, construction activities generate staggering quantities of waste with
a very small fraction of the waste being recycled or reused. Annually, 145 million tons of

construction and demolition waste is generated in the United States, out of which 92

25

percent is from demolition activities and the rest from construction activities (Augenbroe
et a1. 1998, Kibert 2005). Moreover, buildings consume 30% of total energy and 60% Of
electricity produced in the United States, and they are responsible for producing 25% of
carbon emissions in the country (Augenbroe et a1. 1998).

In response to these harmful impacts, the construction industry has been gradually
steering towards efﬁcient utilization Of natural resources. Concurrently, there has also
been an increase in green building rating tools to measure this resource efﬁciency. In the
United States, LEED®-NC green building rating system, developed by USGBC is a

widely accepted system.

2.2.1 Attributes Of Green Buildings

From the inception of the green building movement, several drivers have been
identiﬁed to characterize green buildings (Gottfried 2000, Kibert 2005, Augenbroe et a1.
1998). These attributes also form the core of the LEED®-NC rating system. This section
presents a discussion of these attributes and their relationship with LEED®-NC rating

system.

2.2.1.1 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Energy conservation has been one of the central themes of sustainable construction
efforts. The environmental impacts of extracting and using non-renewable energy sources
are profound, and the cost of extracting energy ﬁom such sources is ever increasing.
Green buildings employ methods, systems, and technologies to reduce the energy

consumption in terms of lighting and HVAC and R equipments over the life of the

26

building (Gottﬁied 2005). Energy in some form or the other is one Of the necessities for
human kind to survive. The energy crisis of the 1970’s depicted the dependence of
human kind on energy sources and the need to conserve these sources for its survival.
Energy consumption in buildings constitutes an entire gamut of issues, such as building
envelope design, use and design of fenestrations, size and design of mechanical and
lighting systems and equipments, use of passive and renewable energy systems, use of
rooﬁng materials, etc.

The LEED®-NC 2.2 covers most of these aspects of energy conservation in its third
category Of Energy and Atmosphere. It also includes additional impacts of energy
systems on the environment, such as the impact of reﬁigerants used in the building

systems on the ozone layer and use of renewable energy sources (LEED 2005).

2.2.1.2 Land and Water Resources

Another tenet Of green buildings is the efficient use of land and water resources. This
includes Site selection, location of the building on the project site, relationship of the
building with the local ecosystems and careful coordination of the Site’s geology,
topography, hydrology, wind patterns, solar movement, and existing natural habitats
(Kibert 2005). This includes the urban development aspects, which aim at steering
development into areas with existing facilities and infrastructure, such as increasing
access to mass transit and reducing dependency on automobiles to address the rapid
urbanization of green ﬁelds (Gottfried 2000). Water consumption also ties in closely with
project sites and building use. Water is an important element required for survival of

humans and other species. With buildings using 12% of fresh water withdrawals in the

27

United States, their impact on high quality potable water is evident (Kibert 2005). Green
buildings stress reducing the consumption of potable water and reusing wastewater in
order to extend the supply of freshwater, maintain balance in ecological systems, and
improve human health (Augenbroe et a1. 1998). This includes use of alternative water
sources for irrigation and waste disposal in buildings, such as rainwater, reclaimed water,
and gray water. The LEED®-NC categories of Sustainable Sites and Water Efﬁciency

address these concerns.

2.2.1.3 Resource Conservation and Recycling

A third major attribute Of green buildings is resource conservation and recycling.
Construction waste accounts for more than one fourth of waste sent to landﬁlls (Kibert
2005). Green buildings work in closed material loops in which, at the end of the useful
life of the resources, they are either used as a new resource in another system or reused in
the existing system. These loops are deﬁned by four characteristics; i) reuse of existing
structures and building components; ii) reduction in material use; iii) use of materials
obtained from renewable resources; and iv) use of recyclable and recycled content
materials (Gottfried 2000). All these characteristics aim to achieve the basic objective of
reducing waste and using existing natural resources efﬁciently, which is the intention of

the LEED®-NC category of Materials and Resources (MR).
2.2.1.4 Indoor Environmental Quality

The impact Of indoor environmental quality on human health has been investigated

due to the potential liability a design and construction team may have regarding occupant

28

health. According to Kibert (2005), in the United States, $140 billion are spent annually
in direct medical costs due to indoor air quality problems. Moreover, as energy efﬁcient
buildings have more airtight envelopes, the potential risk of indoor air quality problems is
higher. Pollutants such as material off gassing (chemical, biological, and particulate
matter), humidity, odor, lighting quality, temperature, and noise affect the indoor
environmental quality of buildings (Gottﬁied 2000). The source of these pollutants is a
combination of building design, construction, and occupant activities. Green buildings
attempt to curb these three sources by ensuring source, ventilation, occupant activity, and
building maintenance control (Augenbroe 1998). LEED®-NC category of Indoor
Environmental Quality, with emphasis on materials with low Volatile Organic
Compounds (V OC), Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) management during construction and post
construction, and use of day lighting as an essential building characteristic, attempts to
eliminate these sources of pollutants.

The attributes discussed above are not exhaustive but are some of the
characteristics of green buildings that are addressed in the LEED®-NC rating system.
Chapter 3 discusses in detail the impact of LEED®-NC credit requirements on the

constructor’s activities.

2.2.2 Green Building Rating Systems

The green building attributes discussed above are incorporated in projects and their
performance is assessed, based on the criteria deﬁned by green building rating systems. A
brief discussion in Chapter 1 described various green building rating systems used around

the world. AS this research builds on the LEED®-NC rating system, this section focuses

29

on the requirements of LEED®-NC. In addition, it will also discuss Green Globes, which

is another green building rating system used in the United States.

2.2.2.1 LEED — NC Green Building Rating System (LEED 2005)

United States Green Building Council (USGBC) introduced the LEED®-NC
rating system in 1998. USGBC sought to bring together a comprehensive initiative for
addressing the impacts of buildings within the environmental, social, and economic
context (LEED 2005). The LEED®-NC green building rating system is a third party
certiﬁcation system, which allows owners and developers to voluntarily achieve a
consensus rating based on four levels; certiﬁed with 26 -32 points; silver with 33 — 38
points; gold with 39 — 51 points and platinum with 52 - 69 (LEED 2005). LEED®-NC
focuses on new commercial construction and major renovation projects. The rating is
based on a set of performance-based standards under the Six categories of Sustainable
Sites, Water Efﬁciency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor
Environmental Quality and Innovation and Design Process. Under LEED® certiﬁcation,
points are awarded for each of these categories that address Speciﬁc environmental
building related impacts, based on a whole building performance approach (LEED 2005).
More details of LEED®-NC rating system as it relates to the proposed research are

discussed in Chapter 3.

2.2.2.2 Green Globes

Under the leadership of Green Building Initiative (GBI), Green Globes, a web-based
green management tool, was developed in 1996 and introduced in the United States in

2004. It includes an assessment protocol, a rating system, and a guide for integrating

30

environmentally friendly design into buildings. It consists of modules for New
Construction and Continual Improvement of Existing Buildings based on third-party
veriﬁcation. The assessment system is based on different questionnaires for each project
phase, which guides the project teams to incorporate various sustainability features
throughout the design and construction phases of the building. The rating consists of four
categories based on the score achieved, ranging from 35% to 100%. In 2005, GBI
became the ﬁrst green building organization, which was accredited as a standards
developer by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for developing the Green

Globes Rating system.

2.3 Constructor’s Role in Green Building Projects

This section presents the constructor’s role in the green building process. The
central theme of this research is to understand the impact of LEED®-NC projects on
construction project management practices and deﬁne a constructor’s role in a green
building process. In order to deﬁne this role, it is imperative to understand the signiﬁcant
drivers in a green building process, and identify potential opportunities of a constructor’s
contribution in achieving these attributes. Existing literature of constructor’s contribution
in green buildings is fragmented and diverse. In order to assimilate the literature, the
researcher has created two categories, namely i) Construction Management Aspects of
Green Buildings and ii) Cost Aspects Of Green Buildings. These categories are discussed

in the subsequent sections.

31

2.3.] Construction Management Aspects of Green Buildings

As owners realize the beneﬁts of green buildings and the demand for such
projects increases, a strong need emerges to rethink the delivery process of these
buildings. This is required as high performance green buildings impose new challenges
on the typical design and construction processes (Horman et a1. 2006, Pulaski et a1.
2005). These new challenges transpire as greater responsibility for design decisions,
planning, management, and execution of construction operations for different project
participants. Some of the direct contributions of a constructor in a green building process
are estimating and waste recycling (Riley et. al 2003). A constructor’s contribution,
however, extends beyond these basic activities and covers some of the signiﬁcant
characteristics of green building delivery process. In addition, one of the major concerns
in green buildings is the cost implications which, as already mentioned, are a function of
several green building characteristics discussed below.

Existing and ongoing research identiﬁes several characteristics of the delivery
process of green buildings (Horman et a1. 2006, Riley et a1. 2003, Syphers et a1. 2003,
Kibert 2005, Pulaski et a1. 2003, and Pulaski et a1. 2006). The researcher has presented a
discussion of a constructor’s contribution in each of these characteristics, based on
existing research. The characteristics identiﬁed include,

0 Establish an integrated project team

0 Explore the contribution of constructability reviews and value engineering
concepts to improve green building construction processes

0 Identify synergies between green building methods and other construction

practices, such as lean construction

32

0 Focus on whole building approach to efﬁciently utilize natural resources
0 Establish clear goal for a green project
0 Educate different participants in a green building project team
0 Use contractual methods to augment greater participation of project members.
0 Emphasize aspects of commissioning and energy modeling in LEED® projects to
offset upfront costs
As observed by Pulaski et al. (2003) an integrated design and construction team
provided applied knowledge of construction methods and materials, while giving
pertinent cost information, in the case study Of Pentagon renovation. The authors cite the
instance of early involvement of the mechanical contractor in the design process that led
to streamlined installation of the mechanical system, smaller equipment size, less
ductwork and more options for admitting greater daylight in the interior spaces.
Similarly, Horman et al. (2006) afﬁrmed that successful execution of a high performance
building is contingent on successful planning and coordination of the project team. The
author states that it becomes critical to have greater involvement of design and
construction teams, particularly the constructor early in the design process of such
projects. Moreover, in order to have a stronger dedication towards the green project
goals, the integration Should extend through the constructor’s team to the subcontractors,
equipment and product manufacturers, vendors, and suppliers (Pulaski et a1. 2006).
Pulaski et al. (2003) identiﬁed constructability reviews and green value
engineering as some of the signiﬁcant contributions of a construction team in achieving
the sustainable objectives of a project. Both sustainable design and constructability

reviews achieve efﬁcient resource utilization and reduce inefﬁciency, which ties these

33

two initiatives together (Pulaski et al. 2005). As these attributes are addressed separately
in green building projects, however, the combined results are not reaped (Houvila and
Koskela, 1998, Lapinski et a1. 2006). Moreover, the constructability aspects in a
sustainable building project are essential as they require expertise and involve immense
pro-construction planning on part of the constructor (Riley et a1. 2003, Mogge 2004).
This requires a redeﬁnition Of the constructor’s role and intervention in both design and
project planning phases, for successful implementation of sustainable building projects.
Moreover, as green buildings involve complex designs and integrated building systems, a
constructor’s understanding of these complexities is imperative. For instance, use of more
reﬂective paint can improve the efﬁciency Of an indirect lighting system and allow
reductions in the size of electrical and cooling systems (Riley et al. 2003).

The third characteristic Observed in the delivery process of green buildings is the
application of lean construction principles. Lean construction principles closely tie in
with the goals of sustainable building design, wherein the process becomes equally
important as the product and efﬁciency is achieved by minimizing resource consumption
and eliminating the waste. (Pulaski et al. 2005, Houvila and Koskela, 1998). Both lean
principles and green construction ﬁnd common ground in their goals of maximizing
resource efﬁciency and minimizing waste in the construction process. Application of
Lean construction principles brings forth possible avenues for a constructor’s
involvement in green building projects.

The fourth characteristic of the “whole building” perspective can be seen as an
extension of the constructability aspects of a green building project. Understanding a

building as an integrated whole, comprising various systems, is of vital importance, as

34

decisions and designs of one system very Often affect the working and performance of
one or more other systems (Pulaski et al. 2006). Past researchers underscore that the
whole building approach is pertinent in recognizing the relationship between
constructability and sustainable design (Pulaski et al. 2006, Riley et al. 2003).

Existing research also emphasizes the need for a clear deﬁnition of green
objectives early in the project (Syphers et al. 2004). This requires involving all project
participants, especially the constructor, early in the process in an effort to understand the
complexities involved in the project and devise strategies to manage them. Constructor’s
early involvement also helps to streamline the downstream processes such as project
planning, subcontractor coordination and preparation of construction documents (Mogge
2004). Early deﬁnition Of project’s green objectives can equip the constructor to plan and
manage the resources required during execution and compliance with LEED®-NC
requirements, such as submittals and documentation. This ties in with educating the
subcontractors about the green objectives of the project and including their feedback.
This is a continuous process throughout project execution and extends from
preconstruction to tool box meetings, held on the job site (Klehm 2006, Toole et al.
2006)

The role of project delivery method employed in a green building project is
signiﬁcant because other characteristics, such as constructor’s early involvement are
contingent upon it. Use of design-build delivery systems is one method in which
construction organizations are highly involved during project design. Use of construction
manager at risk and a negotiated general contractor system also allows constructor’s early

involvement in the project (Kibert 2005). Such systems also facilitate the preparation of

35

construction documents and deﬁne the required responsibilities in the subcontracts
(Syphers et al. 2003). In case of hard bid projects, clear deﬁnition of the green objectives
of the project is essential for obtaining a realistic project cost and avoiding high
contingencies and errors and omissions (Kibert 2005).

According to Syphers et al. (2003), one of the most signiﬁcant categories within
the LEED®-NC rating system is Energy and Atmosphere. This category has the most
points and requires increased involvement of designers, commissioning authorities,
service consultants, and the constructors. Within this category, commissioning and
energy modeling are the credits that can add signiﬁcant upfront costs in a green building
project and need rigorous monitoring. In addition, the design strategies and the
responsibilities associated with these credits should be clearly deﬁned in the construction
documents for effective project planning and execution (Toole et a1. 2006). A
constructor’s early involvement can facilitate the LEED®-NC documentation
requirements for these credits.

Riley et al. (2003) called for a pronounced change in the prevalent organizational
structure of construction processes. Four vital areas of estimation, green building
materials, indoor air quality management, and waste minimization & recycling have been
identiﬁed in the process of green construction for gaining contractor’s input. The role of
cost estimating during the project planning and preconstruction stage is imperative to
include timely cost information concerned with green design decisions. In the case of
green building materials, contractors have an increased responsibility towards educating
themselves, subcontractors, and owners regarding environmental beneﬁts of green

building materials as well as ensuring their proper handling, storage and installation

36

procedures (Riley et al. 2003, Mogge 2004). Construction waste collection and recycling,
especially for a LEED® project, mandates a construction waste management plan.
Similarly, maintaining optimum indoor environmental quality standards during
construction requires preparation and adoption of an indoor air quality management plan
(Marden 2003). In addition, use of a construction management and design build delivery
system allows for greater involvement of construction teams in the design phase and has
been successfully used by many government agencies seeking LEED® certiﬁcation
(Marden 2003, Kibert 2005).

Responsibilities identiﬁed in the literature form only a fraction of increase in the
contractor’s role in construction of green buildings. In addition, compliance with green
building rating systems such as LEED®-NC require even more comprehensive practices,
which require early involvement and a more integrated role of the construction team in
successfully executing green building projects (Syal 2005). In conclusion, construction
teams can provide valuable input to the owner and the design team in improving the
process of delivering sustainable buildings, if involved early in the process and can be

instrumental in achieving the sustainable project objectives.

2.3.2 Cost Aspects of Green Buildings

One Of the major impediments to full acceptance of the LEED®-NC rating system
is the concern that green buildings cost more than typical buildings. Even though the
lifecycle cost of green buildings offsets the increase in upfront costs, some level of green
premitun is always associated with such buildings (Syphers et al. 2005). Various

researchers have concluded that the amount of this green premium results from decisions

37

made by the project team throughout the project duration (Syphers et al. 2005, Riley et al.
2005)

According to Romm et al. (1994), up-front building and design costs constitute
only a fraction of the building’s life—cycle costs, and when one percent of a project’s up-
front costs are Spent, at least 70 percent of its life-cycle costs may already be committed.
Thus, high initial costs have been perceived as a characteristic of green buildings and
prohibitive in their acceptance and implementation by owners (Kats et al. 2003). Three
important factors behind this perception are lack of life cycle costing, insufﬁcient
technical data available and an incomplete integration between project members. Several
researchers have attempted to quantify these upfront costs associated with green
buildings, in terms of savings accrued over the life of the building with the help of life
cycle costing (LCC) (Matthiessen & Morris 2004, GSA 2004). The savings are incurred
through decreased energy and water consumption, waste minimization efforts, and health

and productivity beneﬁts for building occupants (Matthiessen & Morris 2004).

Most of these cost studies have taken LEED®-NC as the reference green building
rating system, due to the acceptance of LEED®-NC as an emerging benchmark for green
buildings in the United States for analyzing the cost impacts (Matthiessen & Morris 2004,
Kats et al. 2003, GSA 2004). One of the concerted observations made by these cost
studies is the correlation between the level of LEED®-NC certiﬁcation achieved and the
incremental green premium incurred over the base project cost. In addition to the level of
certiﬁcation achieved, the project cost for a green building is also affected by factors such
as project location, local and regional design standards, building codes and initiatives,

bidding scenario, size of building and intent of project goals. For instance, the cost of

38

executing construction waste management credits is signiﬁcantly impacted by project
location, as an urban project incurs low transportation cost and has easy access to
recycling facilities (Matthiessen & Morris 2004, Syphers et al. 2003). Similarly, the
bidding scenario in a project may also augment the project cost due to the constructors’
perceived risk of executing a green building and increasing the contingency in the project
estimate (Matthiessen & Morris 2004, Mogge 2004, GSA 2004). The upfront cost of
constructing green buildings needs to be balanced against the beneﬁts reaped by the
owner in two categories of tangible and intangible beneﬁts (Kats et al. 2003, Matthiessen
& Morris 2004). Tangible beneﬁts include savings in energy consumption, water
utilization, and operational and maintenance cost savings. The intangible beneﬁts are
difficult to approximate, but include health and productivity beneﬁts and other aspects of
occupant well being.

One of the most signiﬁcant conclusions drawn in the cost impact studies is that an
integrated team effort minimizes the premium in green buildings. The integrated team
helps to establish the green Objectives of the project early on and utilize the expertise of
various project members. AS an important member of a project team, a constructor can
provide valuable input through constructability reviews, value engineering efforts,
material selection and procurement decisions and conceptual cost estimates in the early
project phases to assist the designers, and help to reduce upfront costs (Riley et al. 2003,
Syal 2005). Constructors have knowledge and competencies, based on their experience
with green projects and lessons learned, that could be used to streamline the design
process and eventually improve the project performance. Green projects, by the very

nature of their complexity, lend themselves to an integrated project delivery method,

39

providing greater opportunities for constructor’s involvement to achieve sustainable

project goals (Kibert 2005).

2.4 Database Systems/ Query-Based Systems and Process Models

This section focuses on existing database/query-based systems and process
modeling tools that were useful in organizing the information synthesized from the two
matrices developed in Chapter three and the process model developed in Chapter ﬁve.

Information technology. has been established as a strong tool for disseminating
construction knowledge and information in recent years (Arain and Pheng, 2006). One
application of information technology, namely the database systems, has the potential to
deliver solutions to decision makers, based on the knowledge collected over time (Amor
and F araj 2001). Database systems are a source for managing information contained in
Simple ﬁles accessed by a number of users, where duplication, redundancy, and semantic
and structural heterogeneity have to be eliminated (Mackinnon et al. 1998). Similarly,
Jackson (1999) identiﬁed the need for data independence and the embedding of structural
and behavioral semantics in the database as key issues in the development Of modern
database systems such as Hierarchical, Network, Relational databases.

Shelboum et al. (2006) discusses creation of C-SanD project (Creating,
Sustaining, and Disseminating) that deals with collection and management of knowledge
for sustainable construction tools, methods, and architecture. The project aimed at
creating a knowledge management system, based on expert knowledge retrieved from the
construction industry professionals and mapping it on a generic construction process. The

architecture of the C-SanD database consisted of three principal layers. “Kernel layer”

40

was the primary layer that helped in processing the extracted information from the
knowledge base, by creating appropriate logics. The “service layer” retrieved information
from different sources and acted as an extractor while the “presentation Iayer” acted as
the user’s View of functionality.

In order to facilitate the development Of the process model, a research project was
reviewed that dealt with the creation of generic construction process model. This research
was conducted by Karhu et al. (1997), using the IDEFO model, in which activities were
depicted by boxes and connected by arrows, representing the interfaces and interactions
between these activities. The aim of this research was to create a generic construction
process to effectively Show the information ﬂow between various construction project
participants. Three hundred activities were mapped by this research, which included the
activities of the owner, designer, and the general contractor. A thorough understanding of
this generic construction process facilitated the researcher in developing a process model

for deﬁning a constructor’s role in green building projects.

2.5 Summary

This chapter is a synthesis of the background knowledge in sustainable design and
construction, which is pertinent to this research and will form the basis of different
outputs presented in the subsequent chapters. Different literature categories were
analyzed in order to deﬁne a coherent role of constructors in green buildings with focus

on the LEED®-NC rating system.

41

CHAPTER THREE
PROJECT PHASE IMPACT MATRIX AND LEED®-NC CREDIT IMPACT

MATRIX

3.1 Overview

This chapter develops the impact matrices of LEED®-NC requirements on
construction project management practices. This work is based on the understanding
developed from literature reviewed on sustainable design and construction practices,
LEED®-NC green building rating system and a constructor’s role and contribution in
these. The primary sources of the impact matrices were the case study visits, interaction
with construction industry professionals, and the input received from the Industry
Advisory Group (IAG). This chapter is organized in two main sections of the Project

Phase Impact Matrix and the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix, as illustrated in Figure

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.1.
Existing Knowledge
LEED®-NC Constructor’s Role in
Requirements Typical Project Phases

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I

Project Phase Impact ‘
Matrix

- I

LEEDP-NC Impact
Matrix

Figure 3.]: Components of Existing Research Knowledge

 

 

42

The output of the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix was used to create the
Database - Query (D/B Query) system, which will be discussed in Chapter 4. For the
purpose of this research, the term constructor refers to general contractors and
construction managers at risk. Before presenting the discussion of a constructor’s role in
green building projects and achieving the LEED®-NC credits, the researcher has
presented a brief overview of a design and construction process, to outline a constructor’s

involvement in a typical construction project.

3.2 Typical Construction Process

The lifecycle of a typical building project can be broken down into four broad
phases of feasibility, design, construction, and post construction. Each of these phases
consists of several sub phases as shown in Figure 3.2 (Syal 2006). These phases involve
different project participants, such as owners, designers, constructors (general
contractors, construction managers and subcontractors), suppliers, and

regulatory/ governmental bodies.

 

 

 

 

Post
1 Construction

. N

. Construction

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Owner’s Need - Detailed - Assign - Testing &
Statement Requirements Construction Team Operation
- Establishment of - Conceptual - Procurement of - Maintenance
gznzglaimems Desrgn Resources _ Modiﬁcation &
q - Preliminary - Onsite Planning Reuse
5:122:11!” Desrgn - Execution - Demolition &
- Detailed Design Disposal

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.2: Typical lifecycle of a building project (Syal 2006)

43

As Observed in a typical construction project, a constructor’s involvement begins
from the end of the design phase and continues up till the beginning of the post-
construction phase (Clough et. al. 2000, Syal 2006). A constructor’s involvement is also a
function of the project delivery method employed by the owner as Shown in Figure 3.3.
For instance, in a hard bid project; a constructor is involved in the project after the design
has been completed, whereas in a construction management contractual method, a
constructor may be involved in the project as early as the conceptual design phase
(Sweets 2004). Furthermore, in a design build contractual method, the design and

construction team work together from project inception.

 

I'T—T'j

I Feasibility H Design HI Construction H Post Construction I
I BiddingI
i Facility Management team

Design team i
S'— Construction team ——'I

 

 

 

L
7

 

 

‘5

Design, Bid, Build Project Delivery Method

 

 

I Feasibility H Design H Construction H Post Constructionl
I BiddingI I GMP I

Facility Management team
Design team v
4 Construction team ——’

 

 

L
V

‘7

 

 

4L

 

 

 

Construction Manager at risk Project Delivery Method

 

Figure 3.3: Constructor’s Involvement in different project delivery methods (adapted

from Sweet 2004 and Syal 2006)

44

In these project phases and under different contractual methods, however, there
are certain responsibilities that a constructor typically undertakes. These responsibilities
begin with the preparation of Speciﬁcations by the designer based on the project
objectives laid down by the owner, and the constructor may submit either a competitive
or a negotiated bid. For submitting the project bid, the constructor prepares a project
estimate based on the speciﬁcations provided and invites bids from subcontractors to
include the cost of those works that will not be self-performed. With acceptance of the
constructors bid, the owner and constructor Sign the contract documents (Clough et al.
2000)

After this phase, the constructor’s operation can be categorized under two phases
of project planning and project controlling. The project planning phase begins with a
review of the project estimate, preparation of the project schedule and procurement of
resources (labor, equipment, materials, and others) based on the project objectives and
speciﬁcations (Clough et al. 2000). In this phase, the contracts between constructor and
subcontractors are also ﬁnalized. The project schedule is prepared based on the work
breakdown structure of construction activities, the relationship (logic) between them and
the time required to complete these activities. Project schedule also requires an
assessment of resources (labor, equipment, and materials) for various activities by the
constructor (Syal 2006). The project schedule represents the plan laid down by the
construction team, as to how the construction on site will progress in order to meet the
contract ﬁnish date.

Simultaneously, the project cost submitted for the bid is reviewed for streamlining

the decisions taken during bid submission. This is followed by procurement of materials,

45

labor and equipment, especially if there are any long lead items and any permits that may
be required before work begins. The project-planning phase essentially describes the
scope of the work to be done for each project participant (subcontractors), the time
required to complete that part of the work and the resources (labor, materials and cost)
associated with it (Syal 2006). Thus, in this phase, a set of actions or a plan is prepared
for completing the project, based on the project estimate and the project schedule.

As project execution begins in the ﬁeld, detailed schedules of operations are
prepared from the master project schedule for execution (Clough et al. 2000). This
requires resource management and ﬁnancial control of the project, which together
comprise the project control phase. In the project control phase, the constructor is
responsible for managing the project as planned and for eliminating deviations that may
arise. This phase entails preparation of project control formats, such as schedule of values
purchase order system, subcontractor payment formats, cost comparison formats progress
report formats, change order formats, submittal & approval formats, and other formats, to
collect the data from the project as useful information, and successﬁrlly manage the
project (Syal 1992). In this phase, two important variables of time and cost are either
controlled separately or as a combination of two (earned value analysis). These two
variables are managed based on the information collected from the ﬁeld in terms of labor
hours expended, work placed on Site, money expended, etc. This information is then
compared with the planned progress and deviations, if any are managed, till project
completion (Clough et al. 2000).

Project completion is initiated with the project closeout phase, where the

constructor performs numerous activities, such as preparing a closeout checklist that lists

46

all trades that will be ﬁnishing towards the project end, closeout of subcontracts and
purchase agreements, any retainages, lien releases, etc. This phase also requires the
constructor to establish warranty items for any post construction work. The constructor is
also required to coordinate training sessions for equipment and facilities for owner’s
facilities management personnel. For constructor’s internal operations activities such as
debrieﬁng of project staff, analysis of estimated vs. budgeted costs, as well as
cancellation of insurance on the project, have to be performed (Syal 2006).

As discussed above, a typical project delivery process iS linear in its construct,
where one project participant hands over part of the completed work to the next
participant, and the process continues until project completion. In case of green buildings,
this normative linear process results in fragmentation of the information as it passes from
one phase to the other and the gaps formed due to this fragmentation result in increased
cost of green buildings (Mogge 2004).

The need arises for a more integrated team approach that utilizes the expertise Of
all project participants to achieve the sustainable project goals. Moreover, a deﬁnitive
understanding of sustainable project objectives by all project participants is imperative
for removing any information gaps. As the constructor is incorporated in the project team
when some of the critical decisions may have already been taken, the project team may
not able to realize the beneﬁts of a constructor’s expertise and input in the initial project
phases in order to achieve the sustainable project objectives more effectively (Mogge

2004, Riley et. al 2004).

47

3.3 LEED®-NC Green Building Rating System - Constructor’s Role

The LEED®-NC Green Building Rating System consists of Six categories, which
address different building elements and deﬁne a set of performance-based standards with
which the buildings comply in order to be certiﬁed. The focus of these categories covers
aspects that the built environment either affects or is affected by, extending from site
development to energy consumption, including indoor environmental quality for
occupant well being (V ijayan & Kumar 2005). Within these six categories, certain
elements have been determined which the project has to include in order to receive
certiﬁcation. These prerequisites are in the categories of sustainable sites, energy and
atmosphere, materials and resources, and indoor environmental quality. The certiﬁcation
process begins in the design phase of the project, and continues through the construction
phase with documentation and submittals in support of compliance with the LEED®-NC
requirements. The project teams can submit documentation for compliance with credits
during the design and construction phase or after the construction is complete (Fowler
and Ranch 2006). Project teams are allowed to have one design phase review and at the
end of the construction phase, the design credits are reviewed for follow up for as
planned completion, in addition to the construction credits (LEED 2005).

This section discusses the role of a constructor in complying with the LEED®-NC
requirements. From all six categories, a constructor’s involvement is predominant in the
three categories of Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources and the Indoor
Environmental Quality, due to greater emphasis on “during construction” activities and
submittal requirements (Riley et a1. 2004). All LEED®-NC categories present

Opportunities for involving a constructor early in the project, however, in order to bring

48

greater expertise and technical background through value engineering and
constructability reviews. For instance, it was observed in case study project “D” that
construction speciﬁcation required installation of waterless urinals that added to the
project cost and required greater maintenance during building operation. The constructor
involved with the project suggested an alternative Of a combination of low ﬂow urinals.
The suggestion was based on calculation of minimal water consumption in the building in
order to achieve the requirements of both WE credit -2 (Innovative Waste Water
Technologies) and WE credit - 3 (Water Use Reduction) (Gardi 2007).

Early involvement of the constructor also helps to coordinate its own workforce,
subcontractors and suppliers based on the LEED®- NC requirements of the project. For
instance, in achieving the Materials and Resources Credits, more than just completing the
submittal requirements, the constructor’s knowledge of material sourcing and
procurement Should be utilized. As MR Credit - 5 (Regional Materials) requires use of
materials that are manufactured/harvested or both within a radius of 500 mile of the
project, a local constructor’s expertise in material procurement should be realized while
preparing project speciﬁcations. Moreover, a constructor’s early involvement in a green
project will bring clarity in terms of duties and responsibilities for constructor’s self-
operations.

AS the estimators, schedulers, project managers and ﬁeld personnel are all aware
of LEED®-NC requirements, their compliance is more streamlined and effective. For
instance, the schedulers during the project control operations would be aware of activities
that may be necessary due to LEED®-NC requirements such as EA Prerequisite-1

(Fundamental commissioning) and thus not appropriate for project control actions. In

49

addition, the constructor’s team can further educate the subcontractors in terms of their
duties and responsibilities for the LEED® requirements and effectively manage the
subcontractor’s activities during construction for compliance. Based on a Similar
discussion, the subsequent sections elaborate on a constructor’s role in contributing to a
green building process based on project phases (Project Phase Impact Matrix) and
LEED®-NC Credits (LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix).

In order to supplement the impacts identiﬁed in the two matrices, two sources
were useful, the case studies and the Industry Advisory Group (IAG). The function and

constitution of these is discussed in the next section.

3.4 Case Studies and Industry Advisory Group

Four case study projects were studied along with existing literature to develop a
preliminary analysis. This analysis is discussed as the project phase impact matrix. In
order to supplement the preliminary analysis and develop the LEED®-NC credit Impact
Matrix, the industry advisory group (IAG) provided examples Of current practices in
green buildings based on experience with LEED®-NC projects and lesson learned. The
ﬁnal output of the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix was presented to the IAG and their

input was incorporated.
3.4.1 Case Study Projects

This research was done under a research initiative at Michigan State University,

supported by the William A. Klinger Memorial Research Award, AGC Education and

50

Research Foundation and the Environment Research Initiative (ERI), Michigan State

University. The case study projects and the IAG are part of this research initiative.

3.4.1.1 Case Study Selection Process

The selection of case studies was based on the willingness of the LEED® project
teams to share information and their experiences. As the focus of this research was
LEED®-NC, all case study projects were commercial buildings. The case study projects
were either LEED® —NC certiﬁed or in the process of achieving the certiﬁcation. Four
projects were studied; two projects were already certiﬁed, one was under construction,
and the fourth project was in the planning phase. The diversity of these case studies, by
virtue of being in different project phases, facilitated the researcher’s understanding of
the impacts on a constructor’s role in LEED® projects. In addition, two projects were
certiﬁed for a Gold and Platinum LEED®-NC rating respectively, while the other two
projects were aiming at Gold and certiﬁed rating level respectively. This pool of different
LEED®-NC rating levels provided a wide range of impacts on a constructor’s role and
involvement in LEED® projects.
Case Study A: Case study — A is a healthcare building and was the primary project
reviewed. It is a healthcare facility with an area of 397,000 sf. The project is pursuing a
certiﬁed rating under LEED®-NC V 2.0. This project is towards completion and the
constructor was in the process of compiling the LEED®-NC documentation when
reviewed. This project provided information pertaining to most of the major impact

credits as discussed in the LEED®- NC credit impact matrix.

51

Case Study B: Case study — B is an ofﬁce building, which is Platinum rated under the
LEED” - NC V 2.0. The building was in operation when the case study was conducted.
As this project achieved a platinum rating, the project planning team shared information
pertaining to the constructor’s role in the project planning, execution and post
construction phase. This building is built on a Brownﬁeld site and reused an existing
industrial site that provided insight into a constructor’s role in achieving moderate impact
credits such as SS C-3 Brownﬁeld Redevelopment and MR C-2 Building Reuse. In
addition, this project achieved some of the Innovation and Design credits for exemplary
performance and design innovation.

Case Study C: Case study — C is an industrial facility and is gold rated, under LEED® -
NC V 2.0. This project was in operation when reviewed and most of the credits achieved
by this facility were major impact credits as identiﬁed in the LEED®-NC credit impact
matrix.

Case Study D: Case study — D is an ofﬁce building aiming for gold rating. This project
was in the planning phase when reviewed and the constructor’s role in the
preconstruction phase of providing value engineering input, as well as undertaking

constructability reviews, was Signiﬁcant.

3.4.1.2 Case Study Data Collection Process

For each case study, the project planning team was interviewed for information
for each attempted LEED®-NC credit and its impact on the following construction
management functions. These were derived from the Project Phase Impact matrix.

' Estimation and Project Cost

52

' Scheduling — Activity durations, logic and sequence

I Project Administration and Documentation

' Contracts and Agreements

I Field Operations and Subcontractor Coordination

The interviews were held as informal discussions and the impact on project
teams’ activities in order to achieve the LEED®-NC credits was obtained. In the
following section, a brief description of the case study projects is provided. The case
studies are coded as A, B, C and D, in accordance with the requirements of Institutional

Review Board (IRB) at Michigan State University.

3.4.2 Industry Advisory Group

In addition to the case study projects, an Industry Advisory Group (IAG) was
formed, which provided continuous input in this research. They provided contact
information of other design, construction and commissioning professionals with whom

they had worked on LEED® projects.

3.4.2.1 Industry Advisory Group Selection Process

The main IAG members were contacted through MSU conduction management
alumni. These members gave information of other design and construction professionals
with experience in LEED® projects. The IAG was comprised of members with different
professional backgrounds such as architects, facility managers, project managers,
estimators, mechanical designers, cost engineers, project superintendents, and LEED®

coordinators. Eighteen IAG members gave permission to use their names and

53

professional afﬁliations and are mentioned herein while others are designated in
accordance with MSU-IRB regulations. The LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix was
presented to the IAG in December 2006, at a meeting hosted at Michigan State
University and their feedback was incorporated in the matrix. The LEED®-NC Matrix is
part of the AGC Klinger award workshop manual. During Spring and summer 2007, the
LEED®-NC Impact Database Application and the role of constructors in different

contractual relations was presented to the IAG members and their input was incorporated.

3.5 Development of Project Phase Impact Matrix

The impact matrices were developed, based on how a constructor can contribute
in achieving LEED®-NC credits and how these credits impact the constructor’s processes
and activities. In order to address these aspects, the researcher developed the Project

Phase Impact Matrix, based on literature reviewed.

3.5.1 Organization of Project Phase Impact Matrix

In this matrix, in each project phase, the constructor’s role in achieving LEED®-
NC credits was analyzed based on the literature reviewed. The design of this matrix
consists of the project phase, constructor’s role/ activities, and an example/explanation to
supplement the constructor’s role. Figure 3.4 illustrates an example of this matrix, for the
Preconstruction phase, in which the project cost may be affected due to IEQ LEED®
requirements, which should be considered by the constructor in determining the project

cost.

54

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, , . Preconstruction Project
Feasrbrlrty/ Design Dev. Project Contracts & Execution Closeout & POSt .
Con‘f'epmal Management Agreements S Commissioning Construction
Desrgn - & etI-up
I I E . l . I - Organization
' strmatron - Field Operations
- Scheduling
Safet Mana ement - Subcontractor Management
PROJECT TIMELINE y g - Pror'cct Controls
Project Phase Constructor’s Role IActivities Example! Explanation
Preconstruction 1) Project Cost may be affected by 1) In order to maintain optimum IEQ
Project temporary services required to during construction, the HVAC
Management maintain optimum IEQ standards, system for the building might be used

for compliance with LEED
credits during construction
(Horman et al. 2006, Riley et al.
2003).

 

or a temporary system might be
installed. Cost of temporary HVAC
systems / special ﬁlters that may be
required, should be incorporated in
the project estimate

 

 

Figure 3.4: Structure of Project Phase Matrix

The illustration depicts the impact on the project cost due to additional cost

required for temporary/permanent ventilation systems used during construction. The

project phase matrix was developed based on typical design and construction phases in a

project. These phases were further elaborated with input from the literature review, to

include various sub-processes, in order to deﬁne the role of a constructor more

effectively. Figure 3.5 shows the project phases and sub phases used in this matrix.

55

 

Feasibility and
Conceptual Design

 

I Design Development ll tr ' Preliminary Design
I - Detailed Design

I Preconstruction II-———I - Estimation
, , - Scheduling
- Safe Mana ement
Contracts and ty g
A reements

Project Execution - Organization
& Set-up - Field Operations
* ’ - Subcontractor Management

Closeout & - Project Controls
Commissionin
II-Post Construction I

Figure 3.5: Project phases and sub phases used in Project Phase Impact Matrix

 

 

 

 

 

In the next section, an example of the project phase matrix, with a constructor’s
role in the preconstruction phase, is illustrated. For the reader’s reference, the complete
matrix is included in the report titled “Impact of LEED®-NC Projects on the Construction
Industry”, developed as a part the Environmental Research Initiative, Environmental

Science and Policy Program (Syal and Mago 2007b).

56

 

9:052:62

000.2sz 05 maﬁa—Hon 00382: 835

.38 8E3 5:50: $583308 05 E 03085

38080 0 0; EEE 085 80.88 sawmi—

0 :0 88085 b_=£m00%0u 900828000

a m< 00058 memos :280Et00 00 ER: 05

E 0808.: 5:5 88085 eouaoEtoo Qmmq
9.30500 5:5 0088080 523800 m8 0gb e

.008 :0

m._00:_w:0 8085 0:0 2088000003 08¢:8ﬂ

00 8E0 E 80.88 05 now 00m: 0s EB 0023

£388.: 000% .«0 030080 0 @2080 0:0 80
02:8 8 00:32 02 >08 :82 028.5280 0.2. Q

08850 83.08 05 5 00889005

00 2:05 00:000.. 00 >08 85 £005 300%

\ 2:08.? U<>m Dahomey—r .«0 800 00—80%:

00 £me 808.? b80908 a C0 00m: 00 5me

mic—Sn 05 com 808.? O<>E 0.: 6050:5000

wctzw Om: E39500 SEES: 00 805 5 A3 2

 

.0800 cow—.055

ESE—om v00 wEvmoEnn ESQ—E8 $55.03 mosmEo— 3%
80.85 hhen—mm: 0 8m $008232 000052: 000 9:002— Seam
£03888 80.85

0828 5500 850 0.8 £880.80 03 com wEES. 03:20am
.608 a so aoeaamv

288% 05 £80005 .mﬁtﬂaE waning 0005 C0 cosmoEtoo
.903 ..m 8 >056 2388:—

wEESn 000% com 00:32 SEEKS Odd 800E00<
0083200 gamma as 00380080000 cams“:

.0308

H0 mew—0.80. m: 05 00mm 00 028808 0855 00.858000
.Amoom

.8 8 98:9an £0885 0000».~ m0 =28.ng 0:0 035%
.088 ._a so Ea .88 a so 5:55 8:63.28

macaw £008 gamma 515 00531800 00% .mEnuqﬁm

Om: Ens—EH0 58:88 9 0000000 833% Duncan—0h

.3 0080t0 800 82.05 A

a
2
Am
c
A0
0.
A0
3
E050w0002
A0
803$
02828000

 

 

 

  

.552:me

 

092$ 00m8§m0000£ I x522 80nd: 0323 82.05 ”NM 033.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I -
£05000 80.05 000503002 bodam-
0:080?sz 008580095- wSEuoaom- Eda/EH FOm—HOME
203808 20E. sags—am-
cognimwco- . _ . _
_
028.5300 9002320800 978m 0% mH=0800Cw< Eoﬁowsunvz 8085 900—880 as 052% :ESQ 3:80:00
“mom a. 80085 0000003 80.85 a. 808800 0080020005. 8280880 cwaon 0% bﬁemmom

 

 

Eon—omens: 80?:— n0coshm=000am I 29:83— :33.: 8.3:: 022: 80.8.5 N.m.m

57

 

 

 

 

 

 

.000_0> 00 2000000 000 .00080000 030000000
0000 ,00000 0000 000 E 000000 aﬂmmq 000 00000000000 .0
00000000000 w000=00 M00008 0000000000000 0000000000
.00 0w00000000 000 .00 00003200 000080 Emma 000 0w00>00 0000 000 0000 - 0w0>_00 000 0000 000 000000
00000000 I 0000M m000=0m ”0 00000 ME 2 00 000 0080000000 000 00.80.0000 00005000 00.0000 00 0000 5 .m
.308
._0 00 00000009 80.0000 000 .00 0000000400 0000 20000005 00500003 .0
.088 00 8 035$ 0800000 000 200000000 w50==0
0000m 0003 0000000000 w0=0000 000 0000000000000 300% .m
00000000 80.800 000 00 0000 0000 000000000
00 0000000 >000 00000 90000000000000 00000000
0000,00 0008000000 000 02000 E00003 90000
30300 0 000000 00000 00000000 00 01 00000000
00 0003 0.00% 0000000 008000000 000 0000
000000 00 0m_000 000 00 30300 0000000000000
0 00000000 00.6300 £0000 9000000005000
00000000 00 .0. 0000000? w000=00 000M800 000
.00 w000000 000 00 00000 00000000 00000000000 0 00
00003 .0008 w00000000000000 0300000003 00 F
.00 00000 m0000 00 00000 w00000000000000 00003 .000 000—0 000 00000000000
00 00000 b0> =03 m00000000000000 .00 0000 C n$0000 M00000 00000000000000 w00000000E—000 .00 0000 .N

 

   

 

  

o.

@0080 mm 0500

 

 

58

 

2:00:00 “00.80: 05
:_ 0000009505 00 0305 20:000.: wE0==n :000m .50 080-0004 Am

 

0033000
0020 mo :00050 0:: 000205 :05 02%
.:o=0E:0> _0:oE000 0:0 .0200: 23130:
00000005 0560: 3:: 080580050 05300
00020: 005 20:80:: m:_0=3 mo cog—Em:— C

.:o:0:bm:oo m::=0 :03 0:0E0w0:0E 05 £05
00:0:QE00 2 0:0 6000005 >05 0022000 50:00 .00 50050 9

 

:0005Q b_>:0< :0 80km

 

0:60:00 0003:: 0.:

E 03030: m:_:o_mm_EEoo me 86:35 000800:
EFF 0030008 $000 000 900000 50:00

8 00030: 0033000 3:00:00: 05 :003 0000::
000.80: 050000 wESO 020:0:00 0n 8 0>0a
“00.00:: 05 mo 002000.03 50% 505 00:29:00

:8 0:260:05 0:0 03030: wEExﬁEEoU 2

00:00:00. 000.80: 05 5
0003000 058 00 000205 00 9 8:00:05 0:0 w:_:o_mm_:::ou A

 

 

00_«_>_00< 10.55004

 

 

UZHADQm—m—Um

 

 

00080.5

m0=_0> 00 00:00:00 05 :0 00000 0500—50—00
0005 w:t0m0a Sm 0000:8000 ﬂ 030.5050
05 £00.80: 000 :_ 002. 20:80:: we 0=_0> 39
05 :0 00000 0:00 00 o: 53030.00 $005000:
05 00:60: 9:00:00 00—0033: v 20000
0:0 A0m=0m 3:80—06 m “.0000 ME 58 m< C

  

05000580000
05 E80 0:00:00 020.80: 0:0 00:0. 20:80:: 00.0 05003200
025% 05 w:000=o0 .8 0:00:88: ﬂ 080.5050

05 502000 5 0:00:00 02980: 0:0 00:00 30000:: 05

00.0 web—0:0 H05 0:_0> mECo 0900:0000: 0:: 0:0 3000 30000:.
39 0:: w:_:_::0000 00.: m0:_0> mo 00:00:00 0000000 000:2:

60:80 mm 2%:

 

 

59

 

#83:: 0:0 900:: ..020:88
0: :23 0:0 050:: :0: :0::: ::0>0_0:-Om:
:0_.0E wig—0:3 550.5200 :0 5:29:00

:woom
0ww0$c 0:580:30: OS E2500 0:: :00::0 0:0 0::0::E0::00
:0 0:0:0:0w 0: 055: 0:0 :05 0053500 000:: E 0w0_ w::0=_0:: .N

 

 

 

 

 

35:80:00 inﬁrm—.0: 00:80:00 0: 0: 50:03:: A:
.9800 :0 -06 @0000:
20:98 w:::0:c 0:: :0:0 =::= 09:30:: 0: 0.00:0
0E0: main: 30:0: :0 ::00 :5 00:0: :02:
0:: w::::0 :0000 030:0 300.55 30:55:00 0:0
0w:::0::::: .0500: 000::00 0:0: :0 5-052: AN
.Amoomé Cw -50 GQmmd :0_0_:0:0::
::0::00:0 w::=0:0:: mmonim 08:00:: @0250 .0UO> 0005 500:0 3:000: :00 :05
00> =0:0:: 0: 0:00w0::0>00 0: :: 0:0:0:0:: 20.53:: 000:: :0 0.0::0:0:: 20.50.. 200000500 :0 :0_:0=0:0::
”0::0::E0::00 :050 0:0 0:000 ,0UO> :0: 0:: :: 0E: :w00:0 w::>»0=0 a: 0:00 0: 030:0 0UO>
.0::_0. 00 :00 EB @3505 :0: .:0::0_:0:: 0:0 :0 0_0>0_ :ME 00020: :05 20:30:: :0_:0:::0:00 :0 55500::
:0300 .mw:::0_:::: 0:50: n0:00: :03 5:093 Avoom :0 :0 0:05: :03 ::0::0w0:0=: Om: 5:5 00:00:0000
.00.: m::_00v 0_0::0:0:: ::0::00:0 3&5: 2 :: 0053500 355500 :0 80205 0:0 0050500 :0 w::0:0::00m .:
0.:00:0m 330...: :0 0:”?— 000 00:0..rom :0 «00:3:
0050:: :0_:0:::0:00 0:0—9:00 0 0:0::0
09000 0:: :0 00050:: :0 0_0_:0:0E :0_:0:::0:00
:00:w 5:3 0:50: :0: 0:0 030:0 0:03 0:: :: 0:05:50 .9380 0:: 00008:: 33:: 00050::
00:30: 0: ::w::: 0:00—0:0 b:>_:0=00:: 0 :05 C :0::0:::0:00 B0: :0 00: 0:0 03:80:: 30: :0 :0::0:0:0:_ Am

 

A0250: N.m 030:.

 

 

  

6O

 

 

.Gocm 8:010: 0805500000 :0 0:050:30 :0 08:08
5 0:0 :0:. 05 :0 b0:00 :0::03 :0: b:_:_0:0000: .0002000 00:
58:00:00 05 £000.08: 000800—0500: 0.2.5305 :0 0000 E

2

 

«:0:—000000: 50:0m

 

00:02:53 Gamma
:0: :0: :0::: w:_:0_00_::::00 :0 00500008 0:0 0050:0005

0050:0050
w:_:00 3:080:03: w:_:0_00_::::00 5:3 0050:0500
08000:: 000:»: :0 b0>:00 00:000.: :0: 00:5 0001:
3:080:03: 02080 00m

.0
.0
.0:

00000000 05 05000:: 00:02:00V .m

 

 

000::000m \ 3:083:

 

0.0m 01000050000

 

000...: 08.3.:

 

 

60:8: 0.0 2%:

61

3.5.3 Analysis of Project Phase Impact Matrix

After developing the project phase impact matrix, certain patterns in a constructor’s

involvement in a LEED® project were apparent. These observations facilitated the

development of the second matrix and are discussed below.

One of the important observations in the project phase impact matrix was the
identiﬁcation of project phases in a LEED® project in which the constructor’s
involvement was most signiﬁcant. These project phases were Preconstruction,
Contracts and Agreements, and Project Execution and Set-up. These project
phases were further emphasized in the LEED®-NC credit impact matrix as
discussed in the subsequent observations.

In addition, certain sub processes under the different project phases surfaced as
separate functions that a constructor performs in a LEED® project due to the
significant impact on them. For instance, under the activities of “Estimation” and
“Scheduling”, in the Preconstruction phase, several impacts were identiﬁed in the
project phase impact matrix. Thus, in the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix, these
sub processes were considered as individual functions of a constructor. The
project control sub process, from the Project Execution phase, was included in the
Estimation and Scheduling functions due to its speciﬁc relationship with time and
cost and any impact identiﬁed for project control aspect was mentioned under the
“Estimation” and “Scheduling” functions. Thus, these functions are discussed in
greater detail in the LEED®-NC Impact Matrix.

As documentation is an important aspect in a LEED® project, and most of the

construction credits require documentation, a constructor’s active role in

62

providing this documentation to the owner and collecting it from its subcontractor
is imperative. Therefore, a separate category of “Project Administration and
Documentation” was created that included the general project responsibilities of a
constructor, and focused on the LEED®-NC documentation aspects.

Similarly, the Field Operation, Subcontractor Management, and Safety
Management activities were organized as one construction management (CM)
function of “Field Operations and Subcontractor Coordination” for analyzing the
impacts in the LEED®-NC Credit Impact matrix.

Moreover, it was observed that a constructor’s responsibilities/activities for the
Commissioning phase were not as continuous and rather intermittent and
dependent on other phases such as Contracts and Agreements and Project
Execution sub phases.

The feasibility and design development project phases were not included as
separate functions in the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix, as a constructor’s
involvement in these phases is project speciﬁc and may vary base on project
delivery method adopted and the contractual obligations of the parties involved.
The impacts mentioned in the project phase impact matrix, however, present
immense opportunities for involving a constructor in these project phases and
utilizing their expertise. In the LEED®-NC credit impact matrix, such instances
have been included as scenarios for those credits, which are mostly design
intensive, such as SS credit -1: Site Selection.

Certain requirements of a green building process, which do not relate to any of the

CM function but affect the constructor’s activities, are included in a separate

63

section of “other constructor related”. Although these activities may not directly
relate to constructor’s typical responsibilities in a construction project, but they
help to reinforce the case for the constructor’s early involvement in a LEED®
project to effectively achieve the green objectives and streamline the green

building construction process.

3.6 Development of LEED®—NC Credit Impact Matrix

This section focuses on the development of the LEED®-NC Impact matrix. It
establishes the relationship between the Project Phase and LEED®-NC Credit Impact
Matrix and builds further on the analysis of the project phase impact matrix. The
organization and components of the LEED®-NC matrix are discussed along with

examples of three levels of impact, identiﬁed for the LEED®-NC credits.

3.6.1 Relationship between Project Phase Impact Matrix and LEED®-NC Credit
Impact Matrix

The previous section entailed a discussion of a constructor’s contribution in a
LEED® project, deﬁned under different project phases. This section deals with a similar
discussion, with focus on impact of LEED®-NC credits on a constructor’s role/activities
in a construction project. The Project Phase Impact Matrix provided a constructor’s
broader zone of inﬂuence in a LEED® project, and the LEED®—NC Credit Impact Matrix
narrows this inﬂuence by synthesizing a constructor’s role under speciﬁc Construction

Management (CM) functions such as “Estimation” and “Scheduling”.

64

Based on the major project phases in the ﬁrst matrix, a set of CM Functions were
identiﬁed that depicted a constructor’s signiﬁcant involvement in a LEED® project. Thus,
the ﬁrst matrix helped to create a rubric for the second matrix, as discussed in the
observations made from the Project Phase Impact Matrix. In addition to the project phase
impact matrix, the LEED®-NC credit impact matrix was also supplemented by
information collected from the case study projects, which highlighted instances of a
constructor’s involvement in LEED® projects. The Project phases and their sub processes
identiﬁed from the project phase matrix were used as CM functions, to identify the

impacts in the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix, as shown in Figure 3.6.

Project Phase LEED Credit
Impact Matrix lm pact Matrix
Feasibility and 1 7 7 .‘ Project specific, constructor's role
Conceptual Design 7 ' ' . identiﬁed for design intensive credits i
Design ‘ ‘ ESTIMATIOTNW
‘ Development ‘ 9- DECISIONS
a " """" ’ . g. &PR0EC,TQSI, g
m .
cu . "I, ,, ,, , .2
*5 E. ~ ‘ "Jim ACTIVITIES, i
'39 ; Contracts and j " "Tiff.” ‘, DURATIO,NS&LQEIC 2
E Agreements i: 777 7 , U
L _ 7i " _ . ‘ 7 _. CONTRACTS&
1Pr0ject Execution , ,,, 1 AGREEMENTS
i and Set-up ' j: ' ' ,,
‘ V Close-Out and . ’ PﬁOJECT
‘ ‘ CommlSSIomng ; 1 1;. pl ADMINISTRATION&
; r ,, 3 . 7 :75. DQQJMENVTATIOVN ‘
‘ \ Post Construction ‘
‘7 i " FIELD OPERATIONS &
l SUBCONTRACTOR
MANAGEMENT

Figure 3.6: Development of CM functions from Project Phases

65

3.6.2 LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix

In this matrix, LEED®-NC credits were taken as the base structure and for each
credit, under the CM functions mentioned above, the constructor’s role was identiﬁed.
The LEED®-NC credits were ﬁnther categorized under the three levels of impact; major,
moderate, and some, as shown in Figure 3.7. These impact levels are representative of the

extent of a constructor’s involvement in a LEED®-NC project as discussed in this section.

 

SUSTAINABLE SITES | MATERIAL a. RESOURCES |

 

SS Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention MR Prereq 1 Storage 3‘ Collection 0f
88 Credit 1 Site Selection

 

SS Credlt4 Alternative Trans-ortatlon - . , . - . . , . .
38 Credit 5 Site Development

SS Credit 6 Stormwater Design
SS Credit 7 Heat Island Effect
88 Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction

WATER EFFICIENCY

 

 

INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

 

 

 

EQ Prereq 1 Minimum IAQ Performance

EQ Prereqt 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke
1 ECIS) ont
EQ Credit 1 r0Outdoor Alr Delivery Monitoring

so Credit 2 Increased Ventilation

EA Prereq 1 Fundamental Commissioning of the EQ Credit 3 Construction IAQ Management
Building Energy Systems EQ Credit 4 Low-Emitting Materials

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EA P” 2 M‘"""""‘ Em" P°"°"“a"°° EQ Credit 5 Indoor Chemical 3. Pollutant
EA Prereq 3 Fundamental Refrigerant Management, Source Control
EA Credit 1 Optimize Energy Perfomlance EQ Credit 6 Controllabillty of Systems
EA Credit 2 On-Slte Renewable Energy EQ Credit 7 Thermal Comfort

‘ - o - -- - o - EQ Credit8 DaylightalVIews
EA Credit 4 Enhanced Refrigerant Management INNOVATION 3. DESIGN PROCESS
EACredlts “ 1:" "'
EA Credit 6 Green Power

 

 

 

 

Major Impact Some Impact

Figure 3.7: Categorization of LEED®-NC Credits as Major, Moderate and Some impacts

66

The major impact credits include the construction intensive credits such as MR —
2 Construction Waste Management. The moderate impact credits include those that are
both design and construction related and the constructor’s involvement will beneﬁt the
project team in compliance with LEED®-NC certiﬁcation system. Some impact credits
are those which are primarily design oriented and may beneﬁt due to a constructor’s
input. One of the primary observations in the case studies was that these projects
achieved/attempted most of the major impact credits, as identiﬁed in the LEED®-NC
credit impact matrix, as discussed in the subsequent sections. The researcher has
presented these credits in Table 3.1. This method of assimilation of credits attempted by
case study projects was adapted from a thesis completed at Michigan State University by
Khosla in 2007.

Table 3.1: Major Impact Credits achieved/ attempted by case study projects

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAJOR IMPACT LEED-NC CREDITS ACHIEVED case case case case ’
,_ , Study-A Study-B Study-C Study-D
SS Preq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention X X X X
SS C-5 Site Development X X X X
BA Preq i Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems X X X X
BA C-3 Enhanced Commissioning X X X X
MR 02 Construction Waste Management X X X X
MR C-3 Materials Reuse X X X
MR 04 Recycled Content X X X X
MR 05 Regional Materials X X
MR 06 Rapidly Renewable Materials X X X
MR (3-7 Certiﬁed Wood
EQ 03 Construction IAQ Management Plan X X X X
EQ C-4 Low-Emitting Materials X X X X
X Credit Achieved/Being Attempted

 

 

 

67

The categorization of credits was developed and reﬁned through a gradual process
based on literature reviewed, researcher’s training obtained from LEED®-NC technical
reviews, research team discussions, observations from case studies and informal
interviews held with case study project teams. While identifying these categories, it was
observed that certain credits, in spite of being design speciﬁc, might be more effectively
achieved due to a constructor’s early involvement and input. For instance, the intent of
credit SS — 1 Site Selection is to reduce or eliminate development of inappropriate sites to
decrease the environmental impact of a building on a site. A constructor’s input in
achieving this credit is signiﬁcant, if the project is being constructed for a developer. As
the developer may intend to lease the facility once completed, a construction manager
may be responsible for selecting an appropriate site that complies with the LEED®-NC
requirements. Thus, in such a project, the constructor is responsible for the site and the
building and the site location should be such that can provide all the LEED®-NC credits
desired by the client. The above scenario illustrates one of those credits that might require
a constructor to be involved early in the project, based on the project requirements.

Another “some impact” credit is EQ - Prereq-l Minimum Indoor Air Quality
Performance, which requires “establish minimum indoor air quality (IAQ) performance
to enhance indoor air quality in buildings, thus contributing to the comfort and well-being
of the occupants” (LEED 2005). In compliance with this credit, the constructor may be
required to include all procedures necessary for compliance with the IAQ management
plan while preparing the bid document for subcontractors. In case the constructor is
involved early in the project, during the site selection phase of the project, the owner, the

design team, and the constructor should consider any polluting elements or sources, in the

68

vicinity of the site, that may have a negative impact on the building over its lifecycle
(LEED 2005). The constructor may also plan for activities occurring during the
construction process that may act as cause of future air quality contamination (LEED
2005). For instance, covering of air-conditioning ducts during construction restricts the
entry of dust particles, which once the building is operational, may negatively affect the
occupant health. The major impact credit EQ 3.1 (IAQ Management during construction)
deals with such construction activities and ties in with this point. In addition, the impacts
identiﬁed for certain LEED®-NC credits on a constructor’s activities were similar, and
were accordingly grouped. For instance in the MR category, credits 3—7 (Materials Reuse,
Recycled Content, Regional Materials, Rapidly Renewable Materials and Certiﬁed
Wood) are discussed under one section in the LEED®-NC credit impact matrix as shown
in Figure 3.8. This grouping of credits can help the constructors’ to effectively plan their

operations for green building projects.

 

 

 

      
     

Indoor

   
   
  
 
 

Materials and ‘

   

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustalnable Energy and Environmental
Sltes Atmosphere Resources .
I uall
ii
- SS Prereq-l: - EA Prereq-l: - MR Credit-2: - EQ Credit-MAO
Construction Fundamental Construction Waste Management Plan,
Activity Pollution Commissioning of Management during
Prevention the Building Energy " construction &
. SS Credit-5: Site Systems _ ’ before Occupancy
Development - EA Credit-3: . MR Credit-3: - EQ Credit-4:Low
Commissioning
- MR Credit-4:
Recycled Content
- MR Credit-5:
Regional Materials
- MR Credit-6:
Rapidly Renewable
Materials
- MR Credit-6:
Certified Wood

 

 

 

Figure 3.8: Major Impact LEED®-NC Credits

69

3.6.2.1 Organization of LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix

The design of the LEED® Credit matrix consists of four elements, the LEED®
Credit, constructor’s role/ activities as a Discussion Point, an Example/Explanation to
supplement the constructor’s role and a Reference section that includes any

ﬁgures/pictures, etc. as shown in Figure 3.9. Each of these four elements is deﬁned for

each CM function.

 

LEED® NC CREDIT IMPACTS

Intent of LEED Credit

Discussion of Impact on Constructors based on the following aspects
- Estimation Decisions and Project Costs
- Scheduling- Activities. Duration and Logic
- Project Administration and Documentation
- Contracts and Agreements
- Field operations and Subcontractor Management
- Other Constructor related aspects

Examples

 

 

 

Figure 3.9: Structure of LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix
3.6.2.2 Process of Preliminary Analysis and Data Finalization
Based on the literature reviewed, data collected from the case study projects,
project phase impact matrix and research group’s experiences, a preliminary
determination was made to categorize various LEED® prerequisites and credits in three
levels of impact on constructors - "Major," "Moderate" and "Some." In addition,
preliminary discussions points and examples for each prerequisite and credit were

developed. These impact levels with corresponding discussion points and examples were

70

presented to the IAG in a half-day session held at Michigan State University. The IAG
provided input in ﬁnalizing the. categorization of credits under major, moderate and some
impact categories and the discussion points. Another signiﬁcant input of the IAG was in
providing examples to supplement the discussion points and the ﬁnal LEED®-NC credit
impact matrix was sent to the IAG for feedback. In the following section, a constructor’s
role is identiﬁed in all the LEED® —NC Credits, which are categorized according to three
levels of impacts mentioned above. In each of the impacts identiﬁed, an explanation is
provided for a better understanding of the reader. An illustration of major impact and

moderate impact credits is discussed in detail in the next section.

3.6.2.3 Major Impact Credit - MR Credit -2: Construction Waste Management
In this section, analysis of MR C-2 Construction Waste Management on the CM

function of estimation and project cost is presented in Figure 3.10 - 3.13.

 

 

LEEDE- NC CREDIT IMPACTS

 

MR CREDIT 2 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT

Divert construction and demolition debris from landfills and incinerators. Redirect recyclable recovered
resources back to the manufacturing process. Redirect reusable materials to appropriate sites.

ESTIMATION DECISIONS a PROJECT COST
1. The constructor needs to assess the recycling facilities near the project site. The cost Of
implementing a Construction Waste Management (CWM) Plan is a function of various

 

 

project specific factors such as (Matthiessen & Morris 2004, Mogge 2004, Katz et. al.
2003) :

. Project location - It is an important factor that affects the cost of implementing a
Construction Waste Management Plan. For instance, projects located in downtown areas
may have space constraints, which may not allow sorting of waste on site. Consequently,
construction waste may be collected as commingled waste on site and waste separation
may be done outside the site premises, which may increase the cost of CWM significantly.

. Site logistics and building layout planning - The project team may decide to rent a space
for waste collection and/ or sorting outside the project premises due to lack Of space on
site, increasing the project overhead cost (Winn 2006).

 

 

Figure 3.10: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost -— Slide I

71

 

 

MR CREDIT 2 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT

ESTIMATION DECISIONS & PROJECT COST

. Availability of recycling facilities- It may impact the cost of hauling the waste from the
project site to the recycling facility. It may also inﬂuence the option of on site waste sorting
or commingled waste recycling.

Examples:

a. In “Case Study Project - B” about 93% of all construction and demolition waste (6,000 tons)
was diverted from landfills. A “gyp monster” was used to grind drywall for use as a soil
amendment. The original office building was deconstructed and used as structural fill to
help raise the entry roadbed ( Case Study Project - B 2007).

b. In “Case Study Project — A,” the project team used a cardboard compactor to offset the
cost of collecting and sorting the waste on site (Case Study Project- A 2007). The
compactor used is shown in the next slide.

 

 

Figure 3.11: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost — Slide 2

 

 

Cardboard Compactor used in “Case Study Project - A" (2007)

 

 

 

Figure 3.12: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost —- Slide 3

72

 

MR CREDIT 2 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT

 

ESTIMATION DECISIONS & PROJECT COST

2. The constructor may be required to create separate cost codes for assigning the cost associated
with waste diversion on the project.

Example:

a. One of the aspects that affected the project control formats, in “Case Study Project- 8",
was the creation of a separate cost code for construction waste hauling and recycling.
The project team created a separate line item in the project estimate for hauling and
recycling the construction waste. After mobilization, the recycling unit provided monthly
invoices to the project team for items that were recycled. Cost from these invoices was
then transferred to the construction waste cost code. This acted as a record for
measuring the quantity of construction waste diverted and the corresponding cost
incurred (F1 2007).

 

 

 

Figure 3.13: Estimation Decisions and Project Cost — Slide 4

For the reader’s reference, all CM functions for MR C-2 are included in Appendix
A. All major impact LEED®-NC credits are included in the report titled “Impact of
LEED®-NC Projects on Constructors”, submitted as a part the William A. Klinger AGC
research project. The moderate and some impacts credits are included in the report titled
“Impact of LEED®-NC Projects on the Construction Industry”, developed as a part the
Environmental Research Initiative, Environmental Science and Policy Program (Syal and

Mago 2007a).

73

3.6.3 Moderate Impact Credit — ID Credits

As an illustration, for moderate impact credits, the researcher has presented a
discussion of the Innovation and Design Credits. This LEED®-NC category is unique, as
it is open-ended and provides immense opportunities for utilizing a constructor’s input in
the green building process. It also reinforces the need for an integrated design process,
which allows the project team to draw from the knowledge of various project
participants. The impacts identiﬁed for this category are based on a different approach, as
there are no predetermined performance standards, as deﬁned for other credits. Points in
this category are achieved by two methods, namely exemplary performance in the
existing credits and/or use of an innovative solution, which addresses the sustainability
goals of the project and serves as an example to be used in other projects.

This research identiﬁed a constructor’s role in achieving these credits, based on
the exemplary performance credits and the Credit Interpretation Requests (CIR),
submitted for this category. The ﬁrst method of exemplary performance sets a benchmark
higher than the existing credit requirements, and therefore necessitates a greater
commitment from the project team. Further, the credits in which exemplary performance
is allowed are primarily the major impact credits, as identiﬁed in this research and shown
in Figure 3.14. Thus, a constructor’s role becomes pivotal in achieving these credits and
exceeding the benchmark and attaining the ID points. As a result, a greater commitment
is required from the project members: both the design and the construction team,
speciﬁcally subcontractors, ﬁeld personnel and all members involved in the project from

the constructor’s organization.

74

 

I SUSTAINABLE SITES |

 

SS Credit 4 Alternative Transportation

SS Credit 5 Site Del cloplllcnt
SS Credit 6 Stormwater Design

 

 

SS Credit 7 Heat Island Effect
WATER EFFICIENCY

 

MATERIAL & RESOURCES

INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
EQ Credit 8 Daylight & Views I

 

 

Figure 3.14: Exemplary Performance LEED®-NC Credits

The second method requires the project team to develop an innovative solution
and/or a design approach that addresses a sustainability issue relevant to the project. In
addition to the innovative design solutions, the CIRs reviewed include two common
issues of community education on beneﬁts of green buildings and green housekeeping
and operations efforts, which have been successfully approved by the USGBC (LEED
CIR 2006, IAG 2006) as shown in Figure 3.15 have been successfully approved by the

USGBC (LEED CIR 2006, IAG 2006).

75

 

1. “Inquiry for Educational Program - ( Successfully Attempted Example )

TO educate a broad audience about sustainable design, especially the
sustainable solutions integrated into the MEF project. Target audience
will include Pentagon occupants, Pentagon Renovation Program staff,
Federal Facilities Division staff, users Of the Pentagon Metro stop, and
the general public.

Ruﬁng

The elements described suggest that the project is on its way to achieving
an education ID credit. Specific requirements for an education ID credit
have been established by the U56 BC through previous ClR's. When
submitting this credit, make sure the documentation adequately addresses
the requirements listed in previous ClR's, such as CIR 0097-ch11-092801
dated 9/24/01. (LEED ID CIR, 1/13/2003)”

 

 

 

Figure 3.15: Successful attempt for the Innovation and Design credit
This method may be very project speciﬁc and dependent on aspects such as the
owner’s need and nature of the project. The commonality of the ID strategies accepted by
USGBC lies in their intent that serves a broad section of users and has a bigger and
lasting impact on the public. In contrast, one of the unsuccessful attempts in the ID
category deals with educating the subcontractors about the green project goals. As shown
in Figure 3.16, this strategy was rejected by USGBC, as it is expected as a best practice

and is not innovation.

76

 

2. “Subcontractor Training Program ( Unsuccessfully Attempted Example )

TO exceed LEED requirements and Obtain an innovation credit, the
contractor is proposing to conduct a Subcontractor Training Program as a
means to increase LEED awareness among subcontracts active on site.
This training program will consist an orientation session and bi-monthly
workshops to educate the labor force about LEED and the importance of
sustainable construction practices.

Ruﬁng

The development and implementation of a LEED training program for
subcontractors will not qualify for achievement of an innovation credit.
While there is clearly an important value in educating the subcontractors
working on a LEED project, team education and integrated design are
standard for a LEED project. Such education efforts should be best practice
and can be incorporated into weekly project meetings. Likewise, educating
subcontractors about issues for which they have contractual obligations
does not qualify for an innovation credit (LEED ID CIR, BIZ/2004).”

 

 

 

Figure 3.16: Unsuccessful attempt for the Innovation and Design credit
In order to achieve the ID credits through such efforts, the project team needs to plan the
strategies and involve its members from project inception. In such a case, greater
responsibility would rest on the design and construction team, if the project has to serve
as an exempliﬁcation of green efforts and stringent adherence during project execution
may be required. In both the cases described above, the constructor’s contribution can be
central in achieving the Innovation and Design credits. Figure 3.17 illustrates a

constructor’s contribution in achieving credits in the ID category.

77

$680 ammmom Ea sou—~59: @3038 E 28 9883280 K _ .m Cami

 

 

.h2m2m>40>z_
>.._m<u kahUDMkaOU
mum—30mm IU<OmnE< m=._._.

 

 

/

 

 

 

touanﬂm
2.3—“383::
- 35995.3.
“Owned
3 36:33

 

 

 

 

33.23%
237.333
- scocoo
ucmaauuo
can
bEsEEou

Inle— cozmuavm .Eoﬁebcounam —

wcznoo £26 £5 _

 

 

 

....zmim>._o>z_
«5.5.5.0 kahUDthZOU
< mmxsdmm IU<O~Em< m=._._.

 

 

 

a.

 

 

53530 a 5.5333 —

 

30m: >2 Egan—m
8 Sousa.

3.32

5:26 3 3230.
3:33. uuonoi.
moEmtm> Ego“
o>_o>c_ >3?

33E. oEOm

 

 

VIII-II...

 

 

 

j:

mucocom .mucoEcoEEm —

 

 

 

3:35 8m... 5 cones: so:
- moﬂﬂmbm Ego—E.

 

 

    

CmaE. ..OFE

 

amt—Cob cum... mczﬂxo wagon -

 

DECO oucmELotoA. EmEonm.

 

 

._.U<n_<<_ 910.521.szan

 

78

3.7 Project delivery methods for Green Projects

Based on the impacts identiﬁed in the Project Phase and LEED®-NC Credit
Impact Matrices, discussed in the previous sections this section presents a constructor’s
role in different project delivery methods. In this section, the Design Build contractual
method is discussed while other project delivery methods are included in the report titled
“Impact of LEED®-NC Projects on the Construction Industry” developed as a part the

Environmental Research Initiative, Environmental Science and Policy Program.

3.7.1 Design Build

This contractual method is most favorable for a green project as it helps in involving all
project participants early in the project. Figure 3.18 illustrates the design build
contractual method for a green project and a constructor’s role in it. A constructor’s
involvement in this method may vary from project initiation or during the feasibility
phase. In addition, the constructor is more closely involved in the design phase of the

project, as compared to other delivery systems.

79

DESIGN BUILD
Involvement in Project:

. . Post
Feasibility ‘ Design ‘ Construction “Construction

Contractual relationships:

- DESIGN BUILD FIRM
SUBCONTRACTORS

- May participate in feasibility studies

- Assists the owner in site selection

- Develops a design based on sustainable design and construction practices

— Provides conceptual estimates

- Participates in material selection process

- Provides input on attempted LEED credits, strategies to achieve them and credit synergies
- Utilizes input of MEP subcontractors during the energy modeling and commissioning phases
- Involves subcontractors in HVAC system design through constructability reviews

- Educates subcontractors about the project’s green goals (such as CWM & IAQ plans)

- Coordinates subcontractors for LEED compliance during field operations

 

 

 

 

._. Contractual relationships

  
    
 

- -------- - Administrative relationships

AIE Consultants

  
 
 

CONSTRUCTOR‘S
ROLE IN A GREEN
PROJECT

 

 

(AGC Document No. 415 1993)

 

Figure 3.18: Constructor’s role in Design Build delivery method

3.8 Summary

The credit-by-credit analysis in the form of LEED®-NC credit impact matrix is a
vital tool that can help constructors in understanding the LEED®-NC credits and their
role in LEED® projects. This is supplemented with the role and responsibilities Of
constructors in LEED®-NC projects under different project delivery methods. This
chapter presented the Project Phase and LEED®-NC credit Impact Matrices developed.
The researcher has deﬁned the intent of creating these matrices, their structure, and

organization with examples. These matrices include the information collected from case

80

study projects and feedback obtained from the IAG and form the nucleus of this research

and the subsequent chapters build on these outputs.

81

CHAPTER FOUR
LEED®-NC IMPACT DATABASE QUERY APPLICATION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter focuses on the architecture and development of the LEED®-NC
Impact Database Query Application. The objective of creating the database is to provide
the constructors with a tool, which can assist them in navigating the LEED®-NC Credit
Impact Matrix and ascertain their role and contribution in a LEED® project. The
subsequent sections outline the basic architecture of the database and its development
from the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix. In addition, the chapter includes an example

to illustrate the application of this database query system.

4.2 Database Structure and Design

The LEED®-NC Impact database is a relational database, which works on the
Microsoft Ofﬁce© Access platform. The database query system was developed in a two-
step process. T he ﬁ rst step was comprised of creating the conceptual model of the
database, establishing the relationship between different database entities, and developing
its basic architecture. The second step involved creation of the physical model for
information retrieval and representation. This step was central in developing the user
interface and streamlining the process of information retrieval through queries. These two
steps of conceptual database design and physical model development are elaborated in

the subsequent sections.

82

4.2.1 Conceptual Database Design

The conceptual design of the database is based on the LEED®-NC credit impact
matrix developed in Chapter 3. A relational database consists of entities which store the
data in the form of values, and are related to each other through relationships (such as
“one-to-one”, “one-to-many” and “many-to-many”). These relationships are based on
unique values in each of the entities. In a relational database, the entities are the tables
that act as main data storage units. The purpose of the relationships is to facilitate
information retrieval from these data storage units based on predeﬁned queries.

In the LEED®-NC credit impact database, two types of tables were created; the
“Impact Level” table and the CM function tables. The Impact level table is the main table
which stores the information for each LEED® credit. The Impact level table contains
information such as LEED® credit, LEED® category, CM function, and the Impact level.
This information is related to the second table, which contains data speciﬁc to each CM
function (Estimation, Scheduling, Project Administration and Documentation) discussed
in Chapter 3. The CM function tables contain data such as Discussion Point ID, Impact
ID, LEED® credit, LEED® category, and Discussion Points and Examples. All LEED®
credits are listed in the Impact Level table and related to the relevant CM function table.
The CM function tables include the impacts for the all the LEED®-NC credits in the form
of Discussion Points and Examples/Explanation. Thus, each CM function table contains
the discussion points for all LEED®-NC credits based on different levels of impact (major
impact, moderate impact, and some impact) of these credits on construction project

management practices.

83

The entity relationship (ER) diagram shown in Figure 4.1 illustrates the Impact
Level, the CM function tables, and the relationship between them. The unique identiﬁer
in this table is the Impact ID, through which each LEED®-NC credit is connected to
different CM functions. The Impact ID is a special value assigned to each LEED®-NC
credit and appears in different tables, as the main connector in the database. As evident in
Figure 4.1, the Impact Level table is related to the CM function tables with a one-to-
many relationship shown with symbols 1 and 00 on the relationship lines between the
tables. This relationship demonstrates that one LEED®-NC credit may have many
impacts on any of the six identiﬁed CM functions, and these impacts are listed as
different discussion points under each CM function.

The above discussion covered the organization and storage of information in the

database, and the subsequent sections cover its functional aspects.

84

cansam saga 02.9.83 1 seamen £8233 beam ”3. 8:5

 

”90.5250
85250
05250
m._.z_0n_zO_mmDUm_o
N._.z_On_zo_mmDUm_n_
:EOszﬁmDUmE

 

 

 

zOF<zE¢OOU mOPuéhzOumam w
MED—#5050 040.“.

A

 

 

 

Hum—.5250
3.5250
5.5250
m._.z_On_zO_mm:Um_o
N._.z_0n_zo_mmDUm_o
5.2.05 zO_mmDUm_n_

 

 

 

  
          

  

~33
c0325“.

5

 

3220523.
«3:52

 

091.5
05EU<52_

U05250
m05250
0.5250
m._.z_0n_zo_mmDUm_o
N._.z_0n_zo_mmDUm_o
_.._.z_0n_zo_mm:Um_o

 

 

28.. w mzo_._.<¢:o
.mm_.:>_._.u< - 02330013

 

 

 

 

tony—U000.—

 

 

 

ouhjmm «OkuazbszU «015.0

 

 

 

00.5250
8.5250
40.5250
m._.z_05z0_mmDUm_o
N._.z_05z0_mm:Um_o
E.z_On_zO_mm:Um_o

 

 

 

 

5.202004”: M 855200

 

 

 

5.000.200004 _.
9.5.52.

 

 

 

9.55.2.
\r

 

      

min... .93
USE.

Um5250
3.5250
40.5250
m._.z_0n_zo_mm:Um_o
~._.z_0520_mmDUm_o
_.._.z_On_zO.mm:Um_o

 

 

...mOU FUN—.05.
w 205.42.me

 

 

 

 

 

35250
35250
05250
m._.z_On_zO_mm:Um_o
N._.z_0520_mm:Um_o
th_05zo_mm:Um_o

 

 

zO_._.<._.zm2:UOo w
zO_._.<¢._.m_z_2o< .5035.

 

 

85

4.2.2 Database Physical Model

After creating the database entities and establishing the relationships, the next step
was to create the queries in order to retrieve information stored in the database and create
the user interface to access the information. After creating the database structure, the

queries required to access the database were developed.

 

Impact Table

 

 

 

 

 

- v . i
I Major Impact I Moderate Impact I I Some Impact

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

| MR Credit-2 |

I
iv 6 , ., i - I. ,
Estimation Scheduling I Project I I Contracts & I Field Operations I

 

 

 

 

Administration Agreements & Subcontractor
I Management

 

 

 

v t

Discussion Point] I —I Discussion Point2 I

 

 

 

 

 

—>I Example 1-1 —>I Example 2.1 I
—>ITExample 1.2 I —>L Example 2.2 I

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.2: Query mechanism for retrieving estimation impacts for a sample LEED®-NC
Credit (MR C-2)

The queries were developed for the sorting and retrieving of information for a
particular LEED®-NC credit and that credit’s impact on a CM function. For instance, in
order to view the impact of Materials and Resources Credit —- 2: Construction Waste
Management Plan during construction on the Estimation CM function, the query shown
in Figure - 4.2 would function. The query collects the Impact ID for MR credit-2, which

is a major impact credit from the impact level table, takes the impact ID to the Estimation

86

table and matches the ID. It then retrieves the impacts identiﬁed under the Estimation
CM function and presents the discussion points and examples to the user. The physical
model of the database was developed with the intention that new CM functions and

LEED® credits could be incorporated, without altering the existing database structure.

4.2.3 User Interface

The main window of the database acts as a navigation menu for the users and
remains active whenever the database is accessed. From this main menu, the user has
three options to select a speciﬁc LEED® category to view the impacts, view the
references for the database, and exit the database. The LEED®-NC credits are color-
coded based on their level of impact on the CM ﬁmctions. On selecting a particular
LEED®-NC credit, a new window appears that lists the CM functions.

Selecting a particular CM function leads the user to a new window that contains
the discussion points and examples for that function. In the following section, an example
for a major impact credit, MR Credit-2 Construction Waste Management, and a moderate

impact credit, ID Credit -1, is discussed.

4.3 Illustrative example of Major and Moderate Impact Credit

In order to demonstrate how the database functions, this section illustrates the process
of initiating the database application and retrieving impacts. Two levels of impact are
discussed to effectively exemplify the constructor’s role in the green building process and

these include a major impact credit and a moderate impact credit.

87

4.3.1 Major Impact Credit (MR Credit 2 — Construction Waste Management)

The database is initiated by opening the ﬁle in M80 Access. The main window will

appear on start up and remain active until the database is closed. Once the main database

window appears as shown in Figure 4.3, the subsequent steps illustrate the process of

retrieving impacts on constructor’s activities for MR Credit 2.

1.

In the main database window, the LEED®-NC credits appear as shown in Figure 4.3.
This active list is connected to the MS© Access forms, which the users eventually see
and can print. The credits are organized based on their level of impact on the CM
functions. In addition, the two command buttons in the bottom corner of this window
function as described mentioned below:

a. The References command button links the main window to the references

used for discussion points.

b. To exit the database the second command button, Exit Database is used.
From the Materials and Resources category the user can select the “MR— Credit —2:
Construction Waste Management” button as shown in Figure 4.3. This will lead to the
next window, which displays the CM functions for the selected LEED®-NC credit, as
shown in Figure 4.4. From this window, the user selects the “Project Administration
and Docmnentation” function. Similarly, all LEED®-NC credits have been analyzed

for other CM functions as identiﬁed in Chapter 3.

88

Bowers omen—Sew £32 umé Bowl

 

 

<> acorn: coma—583 v5 cg 23:5: 3 80:3 alto: 209635: :35;
. . 1 .F 33:35 6:
83350.. 29.33: we. 8.53:3 34 a< 08H. i>u an: cot

 

    

£829 99-850
53853)}; «“30

   

 

.
_ 3823..“
3099.5 2038 92 29.55022.

Evian—$8 ”Eda

93259132.. A «$903

aoﬁamuoEEEEou 05.900“.
Eggs—35:13.56; mgdw
33.35... eééezﬁ v :85 .8

 
   

553E583 2.355

855.31.35.58 2.305..
gggangﬁ
gaging:

2.5%.} 355 ”5.33““ or: *0 "55.572523

         
 

 

:15 :.....E.um2.é..4 OS .LozvnsEoU m .535 .00
iii; vocab... N 5.3 3
228.8: e32 538:... .28

 

 

 

§E§§p§~§3 §é£_§w3
85.5.53: .553: _ £8 >¥§b 523

>516 15328.3 882. 5.93. 33...... so: a 5.3 a

0003 3:53 A read 5... 8083 in: s Sun

 

«zines 22.5.5". 32.5 o 535 a:
EmEaELEG 2% m :va mm

338055038582 13mm

5.3.925 E .3! >338 9.933826.— n «590 mm
3360.835 rug 5
£09365 5.2365 3322 coaxgEou — U335 mm

35 0.35.553

  

8§§3%_3¥§5 — 0895::
«35.533 92 45.052

m¢OPOD¢Pw200 20 mPUwﬁOKQ 02.®Omm._ ...—O b.0522.

 

3:55 5:95 554

 

 

 

89

226:5 20 I «aoaowmﬁwz Ema? :owosbmcoo-m 555 ME ”3‘ 059m

 

 

 

83 «322 3303:: 23m Suzy;
«S 639.55 8.33609 v5 533 uc_:coE 3 39.8 53.59:. 33596.5 83259.0.
8:2: .0 5.82:3 .283 .5183 9: o3: i=5 .3
3:653 5:83. .2: 8:393 uo< “2 083 ...»m :32 co...

 

3:85 cum: 2 E33. 7
beau—01.333328 hoﬁo ﬁl

cotnczﬂooo ..ouuubcounsm was $059.30 Eur. _11
I, mucoE8Lu< use 302.50 _I.
:0:—3:05:qu tau co_u2un._c_E_u< «8.8.5 wl.

28.. Ba 20:83 .8333": .uczauoﬁm _1

~30 80?... van 32$qu 33.2.33 ﬂ.

egos—Quasi: Damn; gaze—ﬂumcoouﬂ “E350 ME . mZOP—hvznm 20 Padmr‘. lav-is.

 

 

90

3. On selecting the “Project Administration and Documentation” CM Function, the
discussion points and examples appear as shown in Figure 4.5. The discussion
points are followed by examples/ explanations that supplement the discussion.
The navigation buttons at the bottom of the window help the user to navigate to
the next and previous discussion points.

In addition, all those examples that contain pictures, documents, and/or ﬁgures appear

as command buttons as shown in Figure 4.6. On selecting these command buttons, the

linked documents, pictures, and ﬁgures open as PDF documents in a new window. As
shown in Figure 4.6, the selection of “Sample Construction Waste Management Plan”
leads to the PDF document shown in Figure 4.7. After viewing these documents the

user may close these PDF ﬁles and continue working in MS® Access window.

91

8:358:82 use aouaaeﬁg “8.3“; -N €20 m2 ”3. 2am

 

 

    

  

EB 5638:.
:8: 06 8 Saws”:
8 Sm: 05 233..

   

  

— Show wmo—U
..88 .o 8&2“. seam mag 8::33 «5.262 53: 05 B
8659 £3.39: ..o on? 9: :0 p33 .wozu choo 93 309.8 £309.? 50:33
.8536 .1308 £262 3 voanv Emou 50.8.5 95 ...a -3035 >p3m 33.. c. x. m4m£<xw

  

ammo Eats“.
05 3.20 8
hum: 05 $522

   
 

.EooN .< -3935 >33 was“: b.3052 no; 333 P88 .33 $533

was 3:352 33 8.3 m5 5 5E: mczgum. zmkbu a :83 Stat; 80.35

05 c. 63:63 @5950. do 3Enm=m>m§ 9 can suite 2260.. 3 035 no: 35:5
83 ..< - “$3.5 >23 9.3.. 432 OH; 355 maggot? “VON—.289 $55.92 .
owmn ”HEM Econ :95 E38>m Sn «5:056 8.262 3coEEoU 0.5 5938 van 396:8 £302 "a 35250
.8: 0“” m>.»o=<

.83 50.35 05 :0 038.3% .383 3303wa »o 33 m5 38% «65 33:8“; up .55..
95260. was 3059.. 8mm; casuabmcoo 33cm?— 8 tom: >mE 35.588 0 20.3335

 

zo_.r<._.2m2308 az< zo_._.<a._.m.z_<‘o< Powﬁomn. ”hoax—s: «022
“580952 333 cozuEumcou ”N - $3.5 52 - $9583. vac ...—otounz

 

 

 

92

30085000 0003: 00m .8033 058800 - N #020 ME 66 earn

 

 

_ .50“. Eta

       

‘

in

<- «0035 >95 9.5 - :05
E05095: 83>; 00.502033

  

“an 3 0000 0.8

2003 wanna—00 8
300% 8:08:80 0:0
£8303 .mﬂswm =<

 

!

:03 30803002
03.03 0030:5300 0.9.03

.3200 030% 0.0 30.0 226 0.0.5.8 02:.

:50 $30 05 00 «0300030 0:0 £00m 05 5000 2300500003 05 03038 .
.0033 00.0.5500 08 $009.50 000
00 305052... 00000:? 00 00630.0 - 33:88 03:3“ 0:0 950:0: 05-00 330% -
:80 C980 0 82:22 .8 an. 3 3 08m . 08m 2950.2? 3a; 2:8 .
0:» 000.800 05 .00: 03.35% 20:00 05 :0 0080 5:000. .0 0mmzum
.080. .2032 - 0033 00:29:00 a cocoabmcou 0.03095 00 .6050»: 33:02 -
0000.500 000.800 0 mm :03 Joccoﬂoa mat—050.000 0 ”SEE“? -
u 300w E306. :8- ~08 30:00 m5¥0§00$

0.0305 :30 226 do 3:0:an00 05 00 060m .303 2503 00202: 9.3030533 ”N #25...
=0 00 83:33:00.0. 05 00:00 $5 :30 23v 0 0300.5 2005 030.5800 0 20.33020

 

 

zo_._.<._.zm_<<:UOo oz< zo_._.<~_hm_z_<<o< hound”... ".553: moi

E0E0mo§£ 00mm; corusbmcou "N - #005 m2 - 305000”. ucm 2.3.032

 

 

93

30080000 "an. mm 0000 £025.80 08.0.1. I N 0020 E). ”5.0 0.89..

 

 

0.0 .30: .05 0.0.0000 c. 5.... 0:0
«00.30.... .0 00.00; >5. 0: 0.00...

0.0.2.00 0:33 .33. "0.0.60...

..

 

 

 

.3383 .23.... .... 039.5 . .030“... 0:08 “.5003 30.0.02 00.5200”.
“ 03.0.... .0. 30:3 :0 000. 0.7.00 0.2m .005. 3 02080”. 9.3033 050.... .008.» "000033 .0. .3 8m «5000 000; 02.0.0000
‘ :5 000: 5.0.0 ... ..0003 50.0.. 0.0.003 3035.02 930.60.. 000.5 ”00.0.60". 28 o 9:50.... 000...

 

 

 

 

 

.... an 0030. 0.5.00 0000.0 .0. 00.2.3 2.0.. 0.9.03.

 

“0.3030... «5.000... 020 09.00:. .300»... ...05 030030 30:32.. «and; 20.2.00. 2.9.0 9.30:8 0E.

U020.023.. oz< 32.4.0020 .uths .50..on ouhuuaxu

.8... 0... 50530.... 033... on ....s natouaE 0.0300002303800000 .0 an... a T

00.2.... 3.00.0 on ...3 205350 «5.0.60. ..< n . .

.5... 50532.22 0.33 05 5.3 ...anu “30.... ..05 ..a 0.3m 00.0E 3 03009.0 on ....s .ouuubcoona 0...... n

.80... 9.50200. 0.... .0

.38 a 00.0.0.0 0:0 cu... E06325... 332. 2.. .0 >03 5 5.3 .055... 0:000... :05 Sync—0.08 00:960. 0... .0u.u.co "0E3 .8022033 .50: ...000 2. a
.9502: 30.3 5000 .0 22:50.. 05 00 00333.0 on ....2 «033.53 330.60. 000 00355.0 0.33 a

.25.... 29.50.23.300

.00.»...0 00.0.0c0u 8mm; 0.... S 2203 .5 $00 030. .0. 03>...“ .0 0.2.00. ...3 0.00.8.0 «......

“3.30 hzmimo<z<i 0.543

000 5.0.. ”.3050500 «5.0.602 00.05.53 (3 £00.. £50.25 .56 50.55.02 5003....
cozusbmcou anon ”0035.02 $50600

 

a“

26...... hzmimo<z<2 mkm<>> m..n.Z<w m

rm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. .3...

Tanzgaﬁﬂ. .@ . #0: Q r»...

 

\—

.j.
.0: 28.5; :8. «05:80 I... .3 3W

 

2 08.38....

 

x’j‘ﬁ. .-

'11

 

94

4.3.2 Moderate Impact Credit ID Credit l-Innovation in Design

The Innovation and Design (ID) category is unique as it provides an opportunity for
the project team to utilize a constructor’s expertise in achieving the green building
objectives. Most of the credits that qualify for exemplary performance, under the ID
credit, form part of the constructor’s role as outlined in the LEED®-NC Impact Matrix.
Thus, in order to achieve ID credits, constructor’s early involvement and increased
participation in the project is imperative. Therefore, the ID category is used as an
example for moderate impact credits.

As these credits are not described in the typical format of other LEED® credits, the
discussion points for these are presented differently.
1. After initiating the database, the main database window appears. To view the ID

impacts, the user can make a selection from the credits, as shown in Figure 4.8.

95

322:3 03388 532 ”M; chum:—

 

lids!

 

Nessa?”
i:;zz

_ $953.3.

 

 

_ 3.9.0 88.... 8.3

 

  

3:56 63:; 5.3:

coasting £35303 9.3 cons. can 8<

 

 

 

OE.

 

339E gueaz<§<>o§e

“305658338 ugﬁu

toe-.3253... ngdw

§3§§§u 05293
gugggiaﬁlgé mugdu

££$.12m:::_.cw.33 v EEC Om

 

Ea Eyehéﬁ as 55853 m :25 3
83:5, 339.8. ~ .55 S

9.3.8: E258 5 883° _ 35 am
3:3.Bviasaﬂ 3.8.53.3 «ES
8.5.8.8.. as £3.32 . 8.2.. 3

E36 1522855 «89..

So; Ecﬁs N 3.3 ms
223.34 ..smiﬁm 323 o :95 x:

1.2.:sz ~§cwmmm a 565 m2

2.73:3 bottom v 385 mi

  

Eosouecﬁ... 23>... co

ézcﬁgzgwgg
mggaz<u§<¢<

SEEK—.8 93 canon .5231 B .oocum €4.82; 59:32:: couoabmcou
02.: 5:3 as
g< 834 Jim an: .3:

 

    

    

 

 

      

.8303 68.6 o 555 (u

§> 1.31.9893 m «3 5
E3 Eon—.5 ﬁgs—u v «‘90 5
”Stairéeqcu nwccgcm m EEO S
E 0393060: 33.8 N E (w
Eon Eu Qua-Juno —a§ (u
«co—cg «canon—t8— glﬁ n 005‘ (m
35.58.85 Eu 1551.! n gt 5
#5:? 3325 mcﬁrﬁm up: no m:_co$$=:cov Ecyzmncf m 73.95 5

g§h< 9? >955

 

 

 

    

33.... Even 58-3 p «59.0 m?
>Uzu§uuu xmh<3

c0223 5331.: in... a ant-.6 mm
«90.6 ‘53 ‘0: s #390 mm

E35333 35 m :th mm

33.5.5.8 328.68 .3... £28 2063.269 a «.36 mm
.5338 gm — .529 mm
5.55;... :ESzou 33:; cocvsbwcnd — 6.1ch mm

a mggﬁa

 

mKOPODKFwZOO 20 whouﬂOMA ozu®numa LO b.0455:

 

96

2. On selecting the ID Credit -1, the Innovation and Design discussion window appears
as shown in Figure 4.9. This credit does not have the CM functions that are discussed
in the above example. Moreover, the exemplary performance of LEED® credits has
been discussed in detail under the individual credits and their overall impact has been
reiterated in this category. As mentioned above, the impact of the ID category is more
holistic on a constructor’s activities, and affects all CM functions. Therefore, in the
ID Credit — 1, four command buttons appear, the ﬁrst two explain the discussion

points and the next two are examples of LEED® Credit Interpretation Requests (CIR).

 

Innovation and Design Process - Credit -1

MODERATE

    
   
    
 
     
   
 

Discussion
points

 

 

[1 IT'E'Ioin'biS’ri performance LEED €33:ng Close Form

 

 

 

1.2 Constructor's Roloin Acheiving ID Credits

  

 

Allows the user to close
the current page and
return to the last active
window.

1.3 Innovation and Design CIR - Successiulty
Attempted

 

1.4 Innovation and Design an - Unsuccessfully Examples

mono

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.9: ID Credit-1 — Innovation and Design — discussion points and examples
From this window, selecting the ﬁrst discussion point leads to a PDF document
which is linked with the database and appears in a new window, as shown in Figure 4.10.
This discussion point identiﬁes LEED®-NC credits, through which the project team can

achieve points based on exemplary performance and ﬁrrther reinforces the need to

97

involve the constructor early in the project. From this window, the user can exit the PDF

document and return to the ID credit window.

 

[ﬁiﬂrmidmm

ID CREDIT 1 INNOVATION AND DESIGN

To provide design teams and projects the opportunity to be awarded points for exceptional performance
above the requirements set by LEED - NC Green Building rating system and] or innovative performance in
green building categories not speciﬁcally addressed by the LEED - NC Green Building rating systems.

ihe following points qualify for exemplary performance
gm. Sim , . ' . ‘
Alternative Transportation

(im: it ‘LI Site Development. Purim! r.’ ian- umiiqiil II

 

The ID points for major and
lCredit 6. ilShrm-aer Design, Quantity Control. Quality Control Sg;1:d:£r:lﬁgits have
Credit 7 «on island lﬂect. iion Root Root '

. The greater role of a
constructor, in achieving the
ID points has been illustrated
further.

 

 

 

 

(.iiniil 4 Rm YtJ-WI C(Htli‘l’ll,

truth! ‘i Harmon-ii Mam Lib, Il't. . \Ev .

(ii iii! 5 R 131' th Ri- ir‘wnlilw Mali-Halt:

( re‘l'li I in: mi: ii Wt ml

hdeor Environmental 913*!

Credit 3. I Daylight 3 Views. Daylight 755 01 Spaces. Views ior 90S oi - - 2

      

 

Figure 4.10: ID Credit -1 — Linked documents from the main ID Credit window

Similarly, the other three command buttons in the ID credit window are linked to the

respective PDF documents as shown in Figure 4.11-4.16.

98

 

Innovation and Design Process - Credit -1

MODERATE IMPACT

 

EMQMMQEQ_Q§£§ 0°” Fm“

 

1.2 Constructor’s Role in Acheivlng ID Credits 1

 

1.3 innovation and Design CIR ~ Successfully
Attempted

 

1.4 Innovation and Design CIR - Unsuccessfully
Attempted

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.11: ID Credit-1 4 Innovation and Design — second discussion points

 

 

 

In. car More Dan-ta Yeah luv-hr iw ]
‘i3 51-. .~ .29???“ moms miﬂ -

 

 

CONSTRUCTOR’S IMPACT l
Exemplary Performance Credits innovate Strategies - (g ..
; - be and existI - LEED credits not Included In LEED Credits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Community
A I'- and
=m~m ~ ......
I : successtully
- oMay Involve : attenuated
1 several variables : Education 3 mail ....
l vProject Speciﬁc I
{- .o‘mhym ~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII“

Needs

 

 

 
      
     

oSubject to
approval by USGBC

 

 

 

  
 

Participants -

attempted

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS APPROACH REQUIRES A \ THIS APPROACH REQUIRES
CONSTRUCTOR'S 63%! £5 Eli
INVOLVEMENT. hale-laealaaa CONSTRUCTOR'S LY

 

INVOLVEMENT.

 

Figure 4.12: Second discussion points linked from the main ID credit window

99

 

Innovation and Design Process - Credit -1

MODERATE IMPACT

 

Elem:::3:vsﬁm:::neuw:eeei I «Mom |

 

1.2 Constructor's Role in Acheiving ID Credits J

 

1.3 Innovation and Design CIR - Successfully
Attempted

 

1.4 Innovation and Design CIR - Unsuccessfully
Attempted

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.13: ID Credit-l - Innovation and Design — ﬁrst example

 

[humouumiutmw

 

5:. ‘i- , ill 4!, e‘ n4~.'~ g1;

lei

CREDIT INTERPRETATION REQUEST - Innovation and Design Process
( Successfully Attempted )

1. “Inquiry for Educational Program -
To educate a broad audience about sustainable design, especially the
sustainable solutions integrated into the MEF project. Target audience
will include Pentagon occupants, Pentagon Renovation Program staff,
Federal Facilities Division staff, users of the Pentagon Metro stop, and
the general public.
Ruling
The elements described suggest that the project is on its way to achieving
an education iD credit. Specific requirements for an education lD credit
have been established by the USGBC through previous ClR's. When
submitting this credit, make sure the documentation adequately addresses
the requirements listed in previous ClR's. such as CIR 0097-iDc11-092801
dated 9/24/01. (LEED ID CIR, 1/13/2003)"

 

 

Figure 4.14: First example linked ﬁ‘om the main ID credit window

100

 

 

Innovation and Design Process - Credit -1

MODERATE IMPACT

 

ﬁlﬁéﬁﬁéﬂiﬁﬁﬂﬁéﬁitiﬁﬁéi ' 0°59 F 0'11]

 

1.2 Constructor's Role In Achelving ID Credits J

 

1.3 Innovation and Design CIR - Successfully
Attempted

 

1.4 Innovation and Design CIR - Unsuccessfully
Attempted

‘\

 

 

Figure 4.15: ID Credit-1 — Innovation and Design — second example

 

HilaMDorm Tatum!!!)
"‘ I I: e a not. :4 al.} N

CREDIT INTERPRETATION REQUEST - Innovation and Design Process
( Unsuccessfully Attempted )

. “Subcontractor Training Program
To exceed LEED requirements and obtain an innovation credit, the
contractor is proposing to conduct a Subcontractor Training Program as a
means to increase LEED awareness among subcontracts active on site.
This training program will consist an orientation session and bi-monthly
workshops to educate the labor force about LEED and the importance of
sustainable construction practices.

Ruﬂng

The development and implementation of a LEED training program for
subcontractors will not qualify for achievement of an innovation credit.
While there is cleariy an important value in educating the subcontractors
working on a LEED project, team education and integrated design are
standard for a LED project. Such education efforts should be best practice
and can be incorporated into weekly project meetings. Likewise, educating
subcontractors about issues for which they have contractual obligations
does not qualify for an innovation credit (LEED ID CIR, 3/2/2004).”

N

 

 

 

Figure 4. I 6: First example linked from the main ID credit window

101

The LEED®-NC impact database was sent to the IAG for feedback on user interface and
ease of accessing the information stored in the database. The comments received from the

IAG were incorporated in the ﬁnal database.

4.4 Summary

A database query application tool was developed to access the impact of LEED®-
NC projects on constructors. The database entities were developed from the components
of the LEED®-NC credit impact matrix. This chapter presented the design and
development process of the LEED®-NC Impact database. As an extension of database
design, the discussion also entailed the user interface and ease of accessing the
information. In addition, to supplement the user’s understanding, the researcher has
illustrated how to access the discussion points and examples for major and moderate
impact credits. The development of the database is the last phase in identifying the

impacts of LEED®-NC projects on construction management practices.

102

CHAPTER FIVE
PROCESS MODEL FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF GREEN BUILDING
PROGRAMS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter entails a detailed discussion of the process used to develop the
research outputs. The researcher has attempted to model this process and make it generic
for analyzing the impacts of other green building programs on project management
practices of different sectors in the built environment, by other researchers. The process
model developed in this research can be applied to determine the impacts on practices of
builders, developers, renovation contractors, subcontractors, facilities managers, etc. In
the following sections, the word “constructor” has been used to refer to these construction

industry stakeholders.

5.2 Process Steps for Impact Assessment of Green Building Programs

The process model for Impact Assessment of Green Building Programs consists
of four process milestone steps of 1) Review Literature; 2) Develop Project Phase
Assessment, 3) Develop Green Building Impact Assessment, and 4) Develop Impact
Analysis application tool as shown in Figure 5.1. In the following sections, the function
and sub steps within these milestone steps have been discussed, along with the activities
that should be conducted in order to achieve these process steps, as shown in Figure 5.2.

The discussion in the subsequent sections shows parts of the process model developed.

103

83.0250 @635 520 we “scammom: 83:: Sm 352 380.5 :6 PSwE

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

ﬁlmy—km

 

 

 

 

 

                  

             

 

  

  

 

    

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.< .<
HL”H.HH.HH.HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHH”_HHHH HHUHHrI.“ IHHHHHHH.H<H
80qu 9:215 :8.» a 5
8.2528 a .8.“ negates
0 maﬁa :3 in; 2558»
u u a” . . Q mats:
muoimom x83 wmmuomm
bmaus .coEmwommu
Ban—E omega Samoa E
053 E 22 32.29“ on. “35:25
atheism {82533 - .
hams—2; 28
39:50 {303650 . 83;: 80.8.3 05
88.83 mid—:5 aooum :o Eﬂwpa Maw—:5 DZmOmA
8%3m 030 E mouuuﬂm E050 52m do «895 05 as:
no 59: €265 .
gonoon< Ea
accentuﬁo I moE=£m=onm2 €290
>526:— mLSogmcou @953
3582552
Haw—moi mic—:5 :0on 9
26 mogiiaoamﬂ 3.55221
$05338 =3 8:080:32 . hzmzmwﬂmmt.
5:33 83% 53.05 baa—03 h0<m2~ await
. RUM—HOME
“.80 3080358 bEuﬂ .quovoﬁo muuuuﬁq couuzbmcou ﬂcoEEEcom
._a_.=oEmm5 583 03.832 05 he oEaEszm no EEO:— MEEEm Hashim—:4
Ill. «moooi “Schumann—2 83.95 £838.. ”Sewn—O 580 32>:
E
ZO—HEORZu I ll
Bow—h mmHUOH—m wmﬂhw mmHUOmn—

104

         

BEE

 

 

   

   

 

 

E 28 3:58.“ QZmOm:
{30.528 - m_o>o_ 83E so
0.0.. .556 com—E £58233. mEEEn
$22528 - :02» us. "Enema—WU
$8.85 .
wEEEp 50%
E mouaoﬁm E250 333:8 {205.528 .8
muuovuu=< Ea no :EE 9265 .uaaE do «.05— 2509
mzozutumpo mmZ—JM—QSU
bums—E: Dana—5m
manna 60.83 05 mem0 to
co :5.on wEEEn PZHEmwmmm<
59% Co 88E 05 32 FU<A=E
. m04ﬂ>mn
.|< , I I I I IIIIII I LI I I I IIIIIIIII R
l . ||||||||||||| I. ||||||||||||||||| .l |||||||| J l I ||||||||| .l
< <

5:53 _ .m 05mm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

_ 4 $32

EEEEEQ 80qu 9.305 wEEEn mEEEp 5on 05 E
.050 E3 nay—«:85 :85 05 E momma 80.35 5.35

:EEEQE 3:36:83. E acaﬁEﬁam >3—

mLSogmaoU {225300 Bo: >352
... ... a
_
_ _ _

 

T89:— oEom; _uuamE_ cab—coi— Toma—E 5.32—

e ... ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

83.2: mEEEn 58m m E
“8255.8 a ..8 =0::o>.§E
.8 maﬁa EaucEmEm oEEEBQ

...

 

 

 

 

 

105

 

6.2.80; 8.0...

 

 

 

.08 00.03.39. E9205. .03.... cam—025w

m......s. 52» 2.. 8.05.. .5 3.5..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

may:
mam—8%.—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“ m
u .
.
n 0208209. WI " 3000....
" 0089.003 868.. .«0 8.00 .05... n
“ ogtaE .8: ma no.5 9808 n
n 030 Banana .... u
. 1.00.00.3— 0230: a 05 3.580509 _ QZmqu
m a
n a I 00:00:00.. 05 00_o>uQ TII
. taxm FZEHOAH>HG
_ A. _ 000... 7.0.20.0...2
0:0—000.030 00:00:09. .8 3003003... 05 33.5 _ mum>d<z< abacus—
» I
t +
«00833.. 800E oE-oEsw MESS: I ,
008m 05 3:3: 000 833—
_
" HI n
" accuse—E 5000:: n
u 8 .8€3. 0.32.. 520 u
n W
n 0008388 8an 00:02...»
" wEEEn :08» 05 E20309 "
.lm IIIIIIII r IIIIIII _ IIIIIII 9 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII . IIIIIIIIIIIII m
I ||||||| I .................. D llllllll . ||||||| I . I I I I I I I I I I
m n _ _ — _ m
" 8000a mEEEn .
_ 9.5.0.5.. 80.3... :8.» u... ... 338.. 3.2.3 88» 2.. ...
n .550 .23 owannoxo 3.5600002 8.3.3 000.800 00.38 E
" 000388.: 9.0.0.5300 {90:09.00 350.0900 >8— 32. ©5003
_
_
_

 

a

...

...

 

 

106

Review Literature

 
    
  
   

  

 

 

 
 

 

 

Step - I
Develop Project Phase
Step ' H Impact Assessment
Develop Impact Assessment
Step ' III of Green Building Guidelines
Step - IV

 

Figure 5.2 — Green Building Impact Assessment Process

5.2.1 Review Literature

The ﬁrst step in initiating the process of impact assessment of green building
programs is to identify and review pertinent literature. Three distinctive sections of
literature have been identiﬁed as shown in Figure 5.3. However, based on the nature of
the construction sector for which the impacts are being identiﬁed, more sections may be
included. The three sections speciﬁed in the process model are:
1. Green building program requirements
2. Ongoing research on sustainable construction practices

3. Project management process for the respective sector.

107

Review of the green building program is essential for the researcher to gain an

understanding of the technical requirements of the green building rating system.

Conduct *
‘ Literature Review 1

     

 

  

    

    

Project Management Process for the
respective sector (residential,
remodeling, facility management etc.)

‘ Ongoing research
Requirements on sustainable
construction practices

Green Building

        

      

Figure 5.3: Literature Review Sections

The emphasis on the ongoing research efforts will bring in the perspective of
current research practices in the ﬁeld of sustainable construction and supplement the
impact analysis. The last section of the literature review focuses on the project
management practices of the construction sector under focus. In order to analyze the
impacts of green building program requirements, the researcher’s understanding of
project management requirements will be an imperative step, which will provide the
researcher with a base knowledge, and help to compare the additional activities required

in a green building project.

5.2.2 Project Phase Impact Assessment

After reviewing the background literature, the next step is to assess the project

phase impacts. This process step entails six sub steps depicted in Figure 5.4. One of the

108

main outcomes of understanding the project management aspects of a particular
construction sector is to identify the project phases involved and, for each project phase,
identify the typical responsibilities of a constructor. This step would primarily ﬂow from
the project management practices of that particular construction sector. After identifying
the typical responsibilities of the constructor, the researcher will derive additional
responsibilities of a constructor in context of the green building program, based on its
technical requirements and other research efforts on sustainable construction practices.
The researcher needs to analyze the gap between the constructor’s typical and additional
responsibilities, and supplement the analysis with industry input. The role of industry
input during this phase is signiﬁcant, as it will equip the researcher with observations
made by industry professionals, case studies, industry surveys, and work sessions, as
shown in Figure 5.4.

Once the constructors’ additional responsibilities have been identiﬁed, the
researcher can now map the impacts throughout different phases of design and
construction process of green buildings and subsequently document these impacts. The
project phase impact assessment will then act as an input for the next process step of
assessing the impact of green building guidelines. Between these two process steps,
however, is a transition step that was introduced to assimilate the project phase
assessment and identify the components of impact assessment of green building
guidelines. The function of this transition step was to determine those aspects and/or
areas in a green building project, where a constructor’s role may be signiﬁcant, based on

the impact assessment done for project phases. These intervention areas will be further

109

used to examine a constructor’s role in complying with the green building requirements

in the next process step.

0.00.0003... .0008. 000.... 80.0.0 - ....n 0.0m...

   

     
         

0.0.0.. 0. 0.0.
00.00.00 000 0.0. .00....0
m..0.00..m000 000 0.00.0.0

w0.0..0.. 002w 0. 80:00.0

h 000.003 0003 0.0000... .
A 00.00000... 000 .
_ m00..0>.0m..0 b.0000. .
0 9.05m b.0000. .
00.00% 0000 .

.000000

     

80.8.0 900...... 000%
0 0. 8.000.000 0 .0. 00..00>.0.0.
..0 000.0 0.00.0.0»? 00.5.0.2.

0 .. In. . . . r I
. 000000 80.3.0 0...

m 00 E0.w0.0 w0.0..0.. 000.0
__ ..0 .0008. 0... 20.00009 000 00.).

8....0.888. .80...

 

 

900000000 ....
800600000. .0030.
80000 .00 .80 ......000.

    
    

 

 

         
 

8000.25.00. 0.0.w0.0

  

w0.0..0.. 000% 0. 000
8.00.838. 080.03.

ﬁlll I I

 

110

5.2.3 Impact Assessment of Green Building Guidelines

The output of the last process step will provide the researcher with signiﬁcant
areas of intervention for a constructor in a green building process, which will be used as
type of impacts in the third process step. In this research, the signiﬁcant phases were
estimation, scheduling, project administration, etc. In the analysis of the project phase
impacts, it was observed that a constructor is closely involved in the project in these
phases and some of the major LEED® credits are dependent or achieved in these phases.
These observations reinforced a constructor’s signiﬁcant role in a green building process
and the LEED® certiﬁcation and their detailed discussed is presented in Chapter 3.

After determining the impact types on a constructor’s activities, the researcher
will categorise the impacts under this typology, for all green building rating parameters.
In this research, the parameters were the LEED®-NC credits and, for each credit, impacts
were categorized under Estimation Decisions & Project Cost, Scheduling- Activities,
Durations & Logic, Project Administration and Documentation, Contracts and
Agreements, and Field Operations and Subcontractor Coordination. Further, the
researcher will identify impact levels in order to classify the green building parameters.
The basis of this classiﬁcation is a function of the research objectives and its overall goal.
For this research, the classiﬁcation was based on the extent of constructor’s contribution
and involvement in achieving a particular LEED®-NC credit and therefore three impact
levels were identiﬁed, namely major, moderate and some. These impact levels were
created in order to help the constructors to effectively understand their role in a green
building process and accordingly plan for it during the preconstruction and project

planning phases.

111

The Major impact LEED®-NC credits were those in which a constructor will be
directly involved for achieving that credit and the documentation involved will be
contingent on the construction phase activities. For instance, both MR-Credit -2 —
Construction Waste Management and EQ —Credit-3 —IAQ Management require
additional activities by the constructor and the constructor mostly submits the
documentation (LEED® IAG Session 2006). The moderate credits were those that had
immense potential for obtaining constructor’s input through their early involvement in
order to streamline the green building process. A pertinent example of moderate credits is
the Innovation and Design category, which has been discussed in detail in Chapter 3.
Some impact credits were those in which the constructor’s involvement was the least and
the credits were mostly dependent on the design of the project. The sub steps of Impact
Assessment of Green Building Guidelines are illustrated in Figure 5.5.

In order to determine the impacts on a constructor’s activities, the researcher will
further analyze the changes in a constructor’s typical responsibilities in a green building
process and the green building guidelines. Three important aspects have been identiﬁed,
which the researcher will use to establish the impacts. These are
0 Identify new key participants in the green building process
0 Constructor's responsibility in the green building process
0 Constructor's information exchange with other project participants in the green

building process

112

Deﬁne levels of impact

on constructor's
activities

 

  

  

Categorize green building
requirements based on impact levels
- Major Impact
0 Moderate Impact
- Some Impact

 
   
   
   
   

Identify

0 New key participants in the green
building process

0 Constructor's responsibility in the green
building process

- Constructor's information exchange with

other project participants

 
    
     
   
     

 

‘Tﬁ—_ —TW

Document the green building
guideline impact assessment

j Obtain Industry feedback J
l 7, , _. 7 , ,

Revise and ﬁnalize the green building j
I guideline impact assessment - I

 

  

  

Conduct
0 Case Studies

- Industry Surveys

0 Industry Observations
° and Anecdotes

 
    
     
  

Industry input on current
practices in green building

 
    

 

projects and constructor's
current role and potential
role in future

   
 
        

Figure 5.5: Impact Assessment of Green Building Guidelines

113

The impacts identiﬁed by the researcher will be ﬁirther supplemented by the
industry input through case studies, industry surveys, and observations made by industry
professionals and industry work sessions. The researcher will then present the ﬁndings in
an industry work session to obtain feedback and revise the impacts based on the feedback.
In this research, case studies, industry surveys, observations made by industry
professionals were used to supplement the researcher’s ﬁndings and the impact
assessment of green building guidelines was presented to an Industry Advisory Group
(IAG), comprised of constructors, facility managers, architects, and commissioning
agents. This was as an exceptional platform for knowledge sharing and the feedback

obtained from IAG members was incorporated in the assessment.

5.2.4 Impact Analysis Application Tool Development

The fourth process step entails the development of an application tool to
disseminate the impact assessment of green building guidelines as shown in Figure 5.6.
In this process step, the researcher will ﬁrst need to determine the type of application
required. Based on the type of application to be developed, such as an Expert System,
Web — Based Application or a relational database/query system, the researcher will create
the framework for developing the application, in conjunction with structure of the impact
assessment of green building guidelines. After developing the framework for the

application, the researcher will then develop the application.

114

   
 

Create the Framework for
Application development

 

 

 

‘ Develop the Application

‘ Demonstrate the Application I
Obtain Industry input on user
interface and ease of access

 

 

 

Revise and Finalize the
Application tool

Figure 5.6: Impact Analysis Development Tool

In this research, a relational database-query system was developed that laid out a
constructor’s responsibilities under all LEED®-NC credits, consistent with the impact
levels and types described above. A detailed description of database development and

format has been presented in Chapter 4.
5.3 Application of the Process Model

The previous sections covered the process model for analyzing the impact of

green building programs on constructor’s activities and practices. In this research,

115

LEED®-NC was taken as a reference and its impacts were identiﬁed on construction
project management practices. In order to demonstrate the application of the process
model, the researcher has illustrated an example of LEED®-Homes (H) (LEED-H 2007),
MR Credit 2 — Environmentally Preferable Products and the four process steps explained

above have been described in context of LEED®—H.

5.3.1 LEED-H: MR Credit 2 — Environmentally Preferable Products

The following illustration is to identify the impact of LEED®- H requirements for
MR Credit 2 — Environmentally Preferable Products on constructors’ activities. The
intent of this credit is to promote the use of environmentally preferable products, which
are extracted, processed, and manufactured within the region. Further, according to
LEED®- H, “an environmentally preferable product refers to products and services that
have lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment, when compared with

competing products that serve the same purpose” (LEED®- H 2007).

5.3.1.1 STEP-l: Conduct Literature Review

For this step, two primary sources of information will be LEED®- H requirements
and the Residential project management process, as shown in Figure 5.7. In addition, the
researcher should explore the current practices in LEED®- H and the home building

industry.

116

1 Literature ‘
Review
Residential Project

‘ Management Practices ,

     

 

            

" _ __ ’ F i l
. LEED-H Requirements l
!

Figure 5.7: Literature Review Components for LEED®- H Illustration

5.3.1.2 STEP-2: Project Phase Impact Assessment

From the literature reviewed, the researcher will identify the typical project
phases in a home building process. For the purpose of this illustration, the following
phases have been identiﬁed — Design Development, Preconstruction, Contracts and
Agreements, Project Execution, and Inspection & Closeout.

Under these main project phases, certain sub phases have also been identiﬁed as
shown in Figure 5.8. The focus of this credit is to increase the use of products that are
more environmentally preferred such as Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certiﬁed
wood, products with recycled content, materials or products that are reclaimed, materials
that are bio-based or derived from agricultural residue and materials that have low VOC
content. Another aspect of this credit is promotion of local resources, wherein material

procurement from within 500 miles of project location is preferred.

117

 

ll - Material Selection I

 

- Estimation
- Scheduling
- Material Procurement

 

 

 

- Project Administration
- Field Operations
- Material Procurement

 

 

 

- Documentation &
Inspections

 

——

ll Design Development

_ l

 

Contracts and Agreements
Project Execution
L._ _ .. _._ , , _

 

 

l Inspection and HandoveA]

Figure 5.8: Project phases and sub phases for LEED-H Illustration

Thus, in the project phases identiﬁed above, a homebuilder’s signiﬁcant role in
conjunction with this credit can be seen in the design development, pre-construction,
project execution, and inspection and handover phases as shown in Figure 5.8. For the
purpose of this illustration, the researcher has identiﬁed some impacts in each project
phase, as shown in Table 5.1. In case this impact assessment was developed as done in

this research, more examples and observations could have been included, based on

industry input.

118

 
 
   

Design 1

Table 5.1: Project Phase Impact Assessment

 

With-experience from

 

 

l. Constructor will have a major role
Development in material section and preparation past LEED projects, the
of construction speciﬁcations. constructor can help in
preparing the initial
LEED- H checklist,
based on typical ﬂoor
plans and availability of
green materials and
suppliers in project
vicinity.
Pre- Estimation
Construction l.Cost of green materials may be
comparatively higher than typical
materials.
Scheduling
l.Lead — time of green materials may
be longer and should be considered
in the pre construction phase.
Material Procurement
1.Availability of green materials in
the project vicinity should be
explored
Project Project Administration
Execution 1. Lead — time of green materials may

be longer and should be considered
in the pre construction phase.

Field Operations

1. Special provision for storage of
green materials on site

Material Procurement

1. Availability of green materials in
the project vicinity should be
explored

 

 

Inspection &
Closeout

 

The constructor is responsible for
submitting the material information
sheets received from material

suppliers and all other documentation.

 

 

119

 

5.3.1.3 STEP-3: Impact Assessment of LEED®- H Requirements

From the project phase impact assessment, the signiﬁcant areas of constructor’s
intervention were identiﬁed as
' Design Development
' Estimation and Project Cost
I Scheduling
I Project Administration
' Field Operations

These signiﬁcant areas may vary if the same assessment was conducted for all
LEED®-H credits, as certain credits may have impact in other project phases such as
Contracts and Agreements. These signiﬁcant areas will be used as impact types in order
to develop the impact of green building guidelines. In addition, MR Credit -2 lies in the
category of Major impact credits, as it is evident from the requirements of MR Credit -2,
that a constructor’s role is signiﬁcant in achieving it. For this example, the researcher has
presented the impacts under the impact types mentioned above, in Table 5.2. These
impacts can be further developed with input from case studies, industry surveys and
observations made by the industry professionals.

The function of this illustrative example is to depict the process used for assessing the
impact of green building requirements on constructors’ practices, so that it can be further

used by other researchers in order to achieve a similar goal to this research.

120

Table 5.2: Example LEED®- H, MR Credit 2 - Impact Assessment of Green Building
Guidelines
Impact Level - Major

 

Construction Management Function - DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Example/

 

 

LEED Credit Discussion Point . Reference
Explanation
MR—Credit — 2: l. The constructor will be responsible for
Environmentally selecting material speciﬁcations
Preferable during the design phase and coordinate
Products them with the interior designer. Even

while preparing different ﬂoor plan
options, the speciﬁcations will have to
be matched with the level of LEED
rating being achieved.

 

Construction Management Function - ESTIMATION AND PROJECT COST

1. In addition to the cost of Green
materials, which may be higher than
typical materials, the constructor
should also look into other factors
such as cost of transportation and
availability of that material within 500
miles of the radius.

 

 

Construction Management Function - SCHEDULING

1. In addition to the cost of Green
materials, which may be higher than
typical materials, the constructor
should also look into other factors
such as cost of transportation and
availability of that material within 500
miles of the radius.

 

 

Construction Management Function - PROJECT ADMINISTRATION

l.The constructor will be responsible for
collecting and documenting all LEED
submittals and obtain the third party
accountability forms.

 

 

 

 

 

Construction Management Function - FIELD OPERATIONS

1. The constructor will be responsible for
storage of green materials on site in
case they require any special storage
conditions. The ﬁeld personnel on site
will have to ensure that procurement
and installation of green material
complies with the LEED-H
requirements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

121

5.3.1.4 STEP 4 - Development of Impact Analysis Application Tool for LEED®- H
MR Credit -2

For an illustration of this process step, it will be relevant that the reader refers to the
development of the LEED®-NC Impact Database/Query system developed for this
research. This process step is dependent on the nature of the research and the type of

application to be developed, as the application development steps will vary accordingly.

5.4 Summary

The methodology adopted for this research was captured in a process model that
can assist in investigating the impact of green building programs on different construction
industry sector. Major project phases and comprehensive steps under these phases were
developed. This chapter discussed the development of this process model. This model
could be further used by similar researches in order to identify impacts of other green
building programs. Different steps undertaken in this research have been presented with
examples to render a better understanding. In addition, the researcher has presented an

example illustrating the application of this process model.

122

CHAPTER SIX
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Overview

This chapter presents a summary of the research conducted and several
observations and conclusions. The discussion progresses with the summary of research
objectives, description of project phase and LEED®-NC impact matrices, LEED®-NC
impact database-query application, and the impact assessment process model. In addition,
the chapter also discusses the future areas of research.

It is expected that the value of green building construction will be close to $12
billion in 2007 (USGBC 2007). The concept of green buildings has received tremendous
interest in the last few years and is gradually becoming part of mainstream construction
industry. Additionally, the LEED® green building rating system has been widely accepted
by public and private owners, further fueling the demand for green buildings. In context
of this interest in green buildings, this research effort focused on the role of constructors
in the green building process as integral participants in a project.

Chapter 1 deﬁned the research goal, objectives, scope, and the methodology
adopted for this research. Chapter 2 presented a summary of the literature reviewed. The
major sections covered include sustainable design and construction, constructor’s role in
green buildings, and database-query systems and process models. Chapter 3 described the
development of the impact matrices with examples of each of the matrices developed.
The project phase impact matrix is a preliminary analysis, while the LEED®-NC credit
impact matrix is a comprehensive analysis of each LEED®-NC credit’s impact on

constructors and construction management practices. Chapter 4 described the

123

development of the LEED®-NC impact database-query application. It includes an
illustration of how the users will access the database, with examples of major and
moderate impact credits. The IAG provided feedback on the LEED®-NC credit impact
matrix and the LEED®-NC impact database-query system application.

Chapter 5 is the last phase of the research that describes the development of a
process model to identify the impacts of green building programs on constructors. This
model was developed based on the methodology steps used for this research. This process
model can be helpful in analyzing the impact of green building programs on different
construction industry sectors, such as residential, facilities management, renovation

contractors, etc.

6.2 Summary of Research Objectives achieved

The following section discusses the steps carried out to achieve the research
objectives.
6.2.1 Objective 1
Identify and analyze the impact of LEED®-NC requirements on constructors and
construction management practices.
Step 1 .° Familiarize with LEED® - NC V2.2 and review existing literature to understand
and assimilate the current research in sustainable design and construction.
This step included a detailed review of LEED®-NC V2.2, covered in Chapter 2 and 3. It
was achieved through the literature reviewed for categories of sustainable design and
construction, construction management, and cost aspects of green buildings and database-

query systems and process models.

124

Step 2: Develop the Project Phase Impact Matrix to map a constructor ’s role in green
buildings during various project phases.

In order to achieve this step, the researcher identiﬁed the impacts of green buildings on a
constructor’s activities during different project phases. The project phase matrix was
developed based on the literature reviewed in step 11 and supplemented with examples

from interaction with construction professionals.

Step 3: Conduct case studies through site visits and industry input.
Four case studies were conducted for this research. The data was incorporated in the
LEED-NC credit impact matrix, and input from the construction industry professionals

working on green building projects was also obtained.

Step 4: Develop the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix to map the impact of LEED®-NC
credits on constructor ’s activities/ practices.

Based on the Project Phase Impact Matrix and data collected from case studies, the
LEED®-NC credit impact matrix was developed. This matrix provides a detailed list of
impacts of all LEED®-NC credits on signiﬁcant construction management functions that
were identiﬁed from the project phase impact matrix. In addition, all LEED®-NC credits
were categorized as major, moderate, or some, based on their level of impact on these

ftmctions.

125

Step 5: Based on a constructor ’s role in diﬂerent project delivery methods, identify
responsibilities in a LEED®-NC project.

In this step, for a LEED®-NC project, a constructor’s role was identiﬁed based on
different project delivery methods such as CM at risk, design build, CM as agency, GC
lump sum, etc. The responsibilities were obtained from the project phase and LEED®-NC
credit impact matrix, based on the constructor’s involvement in the project. For instance,
in a design build contractual method, the constructor is involved much earlier in the
project as compared to a GC lump sum contract, in which the constructor is mostly
involved in the project after the design is complete and construction documents have

been prepared.

Step 6: Conduct an Industry Advisory Group (IAG) work session, to obtain feedback on
the outputs developed in steps 4 and 5.
In this step, the LEED®-NC credit impact matrix was presented to the industry advisory

group. The examples and feedback obtained were incorporated.

6.2.2 Objective 2

Develop the database-query system to assist the constructors’ in successfully navigating
LEED®-NC rating system.

Step — 7: Review literature on database systems to understand their architecture and
working mechanism.

This step was conducted as a part of the literature review with one of the categories

focusing on database-query systems. This step was instrumental in determining the type

126

of database to be developed, organization of the database, and database entities to be

developed for this research, based on the type of information to be stored.

Step — 8: Identify the entities (tables, forms and queries) required for developing the
database, create the entity relationship diagram, and develop the rules of data retrieval,
based on the LEED®-NC Credit Impact Matrix.

This step was accomplished with the help of literature reviewed on database -- query
systems. Two types of tables were created: impact level and CM function table that acted
as the main storage units of information, and queries were developed to sort information
from these storage units. Database forms were created for the user interface, in which the
information sorted by the query would appear. An entity relationship diagram was
developed for the database that established the basic rules of information sorting and
retrieval and eliminated any data redundancy. The rules were created to allow future
additions in the database. Based on the database components created in the previous step,

the LEED-NC impact database was developed in this step.

Step —— 9: Develop the database, based on information synthesized in objective 1.
Based on the database components created in the previous step, the LEED®-NC impact

database was developed in this step.
Step — 10: Obtain feedback from the [A G.

The database was presented to the IAG to obtain feedback on the user interface and ease

of accessing the information. The feedback obtained was incorporated.

127

6.2.3 Objective 3

Based on the methodology followed in this research, develop a process model for
investigating a constructor’s role in other green buildings programs such as LEED-
Homes, LEED — Commercial Interiors, etc.

Step — 11: Compile the comprehensive methodology steps, followed in objectives 1 and 2.
This was achieved by mapping the process followed in objectives one and two and

compiling the steps.

Step — 12: Develop a process model to assess the impact of a green building program on
a constructor ’s activities.

Based on the process mapped above, a process model was developed to identify a
constructor’s role in a green building program. Detailed tasks required for each phase in

the process model were developed in this step.

Step — 13: Illustrate the application of the process model.

This step was accomplished by illustrating the application of the process model, with an
example of LEED®- Homes. The illustration identiﬁed the impacts of LEED®- H on a
homebuilder’s processes. A smaller version of the project phase and LEED®- H impact

assessments was developed, as a part of the illustration.
6.3 Conclusions and Observations/Inferences

This section presents the conclusions and observations/inferences drawn in this

research. This research identiﬁes how constructors can understand the impacts of various

128

LEED® requirements on their roles and practices in executing green projects, which can
equip them to become a value-adding member on a LEED® project team.

One of the primary aspects of understanding the LEED® requirements is to focus
on those credits that require constructor’s direct involvement. This was achieved by
categorization of LEED®-NC credits into major, moderate and some impacts to facilitate
the constructors’ understanding of their roles in providing input on these credits. This
categorization can be of vital importance to the constructors in order for them to plan
their activities required to achieve LEED®-NC credits. The major impact credits
identiﬁed in this research include; SS Prereq - 1 Construction Activity Pollution
Prevention and SS Credit 5 Site Development, EA Prereq l-Fundamental Commissioning
of Building Systems and EA Credit 3-Enhanced Commissioning, MR Credit 2-
Construction Waste Management and MR Credit 3-7- Materials Reuse, Recycled
Content, Regional Materials, Rapidly Renewable Materials, Certiﬁed Wood, EQ Credit
3- Indoor Air Quality Management, and EQ Credit 4- Low Emitting Materials. Based on
the major impact credits identiﬁed in this research, a constructor can contribute in
achieving 18 points under the credits mentioned above. This constitutes approximately
26% from a total of 69 points and 2 prerequisites of SS Prereq-l and EA Prereq-l.

In addition to the impact categories created, constructors’ roles in achieving certain
major impact credits were similar and discussed collectively. For instance, MR credits 3-
7 require that the achieved compliance should be expressed in terms of the cost of the
materials, which is furnished by the constructor based on the ﬁnal cost invoices.

Similarly, the efforts required by the constructor in order to comply with SS Prereq 1,

129

also help to achieve the requirements of SS Credit 5, as the intent is similar to SS Prereq-
1.

The moderate impact category consists of those credits, which can beneﬁt from a
constructor’s participation and it includes; SS Credit 3— Brownﬁeld Redevelopment, SS
Credit 6- Storrnwater Design, WE Credit 2- Innovative Waste water technologies, WE
Credit 3- Water Use Reduction, MR Credit 1- Building Reuse, ID Credit 1- Innovation in
Design. Although these credits are considerably affected by design decisions, it can be
concluded that the constructors’ involvement in these credits can help in streamlining
their compliance.

The impact of LEED® credits was analyzed on typical CM functions; estimation
decisions & project cost, scheduling- activities, durations & logic, project administration
and documentation, contracts and agreements, and ﬁeld operations and subcontractor
coordination. Amongst the major impact credits, it was observed that MR credits 3-7,
have a signiﬁcant impact on project cost and estimation decisions. The scheduling-
activities, durations & logic CM function were affected by MR credits 3-7 EA prereq-l
and credit 3. In case of MR category, the impact was due to increase in lead-time for
procurement and, for commissioning credits, the primary impact was on logic and
sequencing of activities. A similar impact on logic and sequencing of activities was also
observed due to EQ credit 3 and 4. Increase in project administration and documentation
and contractual agreements was evident in most of the major impact credits due to the
LEED®-NC documentation requirements, but the impact was dominant for MR credits 3-

7. The impact on ﬁeld operations and subcontractor coordination is mostly apparent in

130

MR credit 2 - Construction waste management and EQ-credit 3- IAQ management

during construction.

6.3.1 Role of Constructor’s in LEED®-NC project

Constructors’ early and greater participation in green projects is also a ﬁmction of
the project delivery method employed. Green buildings require an integrated team
approach, due to their complex requirements. Based on the understanding developed
from the literature and interaction with construction professionals it can be summarized
that a design build contractual method is the most appropriate project delivery method for
green buildings. As observed in interaction with construction professionals and discussed
in Chapter 3, however, both CM at risk and CM as agency are the favorable contractual
relationships for a green project. In addition, the GC lump sum contract, which is used by
a majority of owners, provides fewer opportunities for constructor’s involvement during
the project’s early phases. In such a case, the constructor’s experience with LEED®
projects and most of the impacts identiﬁed in this research can help the construction team
to effectively plan for the LEED® requirements and the project’s sustainable objectives.

Constructor’s early involvement can also help the project team to achieve some of
the credits in the Innovation and Design (ID) category. A constructor can make
signiﬁcant contribution in achieving these credits, as most of the exemplary performance
credits under ID are construction-based credits, such as MR credit 2 - construction waste
management plan, MR credits 3-7, etc. The analysis of all LEED®-NC credits on
construction management practices provides a strong case of a constructor’s contribution

in LEED® projects and the additional responsibilities that constructors may have to

131

assume in a green project. It also reinforces the need for early involvement of
constructors in LEED® projects in order to streamline the design and construction
processes and utilize the expertise of the constructors and their downstream participants,
such as subcontractors.

Early involvement of a constructor can also provide the owner and designer with
cost implications of pursing certain LEED®-NC credits. The constructor’s team can
develop “what-if” scenarios of cost implications of pursuing speciﬁc LEED®-NC credits.
In addition, the constructor may also undertake life cycle cost analysis of materials and
products, while preparing construction documents to determine the optimum solution
based on the owner’s requirements. A constructor’s involvement in the initial phases of a
green project can help in educating the subcontractors about the LEED®-NC requirements
and their additional responsibilities in a green project, which can help to prepare for these
requirements during the project-planning phase. Based on the research work, existing
literature, and interaction with construction professionals, some of the signiﬁcant
contributions of constructors in a LEED®-NC project are identiﬁed below;

0 In case of design build contract, participate in feasibility studies during initial
project stages and develop a design based on sustainable design and
construction practices.

0 Provide conceptual estimates and participate in material selection process.

0 Provide input on attempted LEED®-NC credits and work with the design team
to devise strategies to achieve them.

0 Utilize input of MEP subcontractors to optimize the system design during the

energy-modeling phase to optimize the building performance.

132

o Involve subcontractors in HVAC system design through constructability
reviews.

0 Educate subcontractors about the project’s green goals, such as CWM and
IAQ through training sessions and coordinate subcontractors for compliance
with LEED requirements during ﬁeld operations.

0 Include additional cost of procurement & storage of materials, commissioning
reviews and LEED®-NC documentation in the project estimate.

0 Include the impact of green material procurement and commissioning
activities on the project schedule; additional activities, increased durations,
and/or logic change.

- Compile the LEED®-NC documentation collected from prime contractors,
subcontractors, suppliers and manufacturers.

0 Include LEED®-NC responsibilities in prime contract and sub contract
documents.

0 Develop the site logistics plan in compliance with LEED®-NC requirements,
including barricading of existing vegetation and other natural habitats.

0 Educate the ﬁeld personnel and subcontractors about the project’s green goals,
through training sessions.

The concerted conclusions drawn in this research and reiterated above, establish
the central role of a constructor in LEED®-NC projects and in the green building
movement. In addition, the process model developed by capturing the research
methodology, presents a vital tool to recreate these impacts for other green building

programs and construction sectors.

133

6.4 Areas of Future Research
This section discuses some of the ﬁiture research directions relevant to this

research focus. Some research is being conducted on parts of the research focus areas
mentioned. The researcher believes, however, that with the current momentum in
sustainability and green buildings, there is immense potential in applied research that
needs to be explored.

1. Role of trade contractors in green buildings
While this research centered on a constructor’s role, there is also a need to explore the
contribution of trade contractors in green buildings. One of the major concerns of the
green building initiative is to reduce the energy consumption of buildings with focus on
mechanical and electrical'systems. Both the mechanical and electrical contractors can
play a pivotal role in the green building process.

2. Developing a building information model (BIM) for green projects to

incorporate the construction management aspects

Current research in the ﬁeld of BIM is being pursued that incorporates the design related
information of green projects. With the help of the output developed in this research, the
construction management information related to green projects can be embedded in the
building model, utilized as the project progresses, during different project phases, and
based on other green building programs.

3. Assessing constructor’s environmental performance in sustainable projects
With greater involvement of constructors in green building projects, the need to measure
and assess their performance in achieving the sustainable project objectives, such as

LEED requirements may also be explored. The consideration of sustainability as an

134

important project objective, in addition to time, cost and quality requires development of

parameters to be measured to assess a contractor’s performance in a sustainable project.

6.5 Summary

As the demand for LEED®-NC projects continues to grow, it is imperative that the
constructor’s understand the working of this green building rating system and their role in
achieving LEED®-NC credits. This research presents a comprehensive analysis of how
LEED®-NC credits inﬂuence constructors’ activities in implementing these projects. This
analysis is a vital tool that can prepare the constructors in successfully navigating LEED®
projects. In addition, as the project delivery method affects the extent of constructors’
role in executing a project, this research identiﬁed these responsibilities under different
contractual methods, in context of LEED® projects. These research outputs can facilitate
the constructors in effectively contributing to a LEED® project by better understanding

their responsibilities.

135

APPENDICES

136

APPENDIX A

Example LEED-NC Credit Impact Matrix — MR Credit -2

Construction Waste Management

137

 

 

 

.303 00.3. ..60 000E0>0 .00.0.0 00. «0.80.00.
.0... 00 0000. u.0 x00. 0. 000 000.0000 .00..0._0 00. 00.0.00 8.5.0.... .3000 00..00:00 0.0.03
.0. 0000.. 0 .00.. 0. 00.000 >0E E00. 50.0.0 000. . m0.000.0 50>... m0..0..00 000 3.0.00.0. 0.3 .

.>..000.£0m.m 230 .0 .000 00. 0.0000. >00. 00.03 300.0000 0...

00. 00.5.00 0000 00 >0E 0050.000. 0.003 000 0.... 00 0.....03 02.00.000.00 m0 00.00000 00 >00.

0.0.03 02.02.0000 5.0000023 .0... 00 0.0.03 .0 m0..._0... 30:0 .00 >00. 00.03 .....0..0._...000

0000.. 0>00 >0E 80.0 030.0300 0.. 00.000. 3008.0 0000.2. .00 00.0 .00E0m0002 0.0.03
02.02.0000 0 m0...00E0.0E. ..0 .....00 00. 300.00 .00. 00.00.. .00t00E. 00 .9... ._ - 02.000. .00..0._0 .

u .80. .0 ..0 58. .30. 0..on .3... £32 0 580.582. 8 63 830.0 00000...
60.0.0 m00.00> .0 00.5003 0 m. 00.0 .226. .00E0m000s. 0.0.03 003000.000... 0 m0..00E0.0E.
.0 .000 00... .0... 60.0.0 00. .000 0.0.5.000. m0...0>00. 00. $00.00 0. .0000 00.02.0000 00... ..

.50.... ...um... 010 ... mzo_m_uuo zo_._.<<<_._.mu

.00... 0.0008000 0. 30.00.0E 030.00.. .00...00~_ $000.0 m000.00..000E 00. 0. 0.000 30.00.00
00.0500. 030.050. .000000 80.0.0500. 000 2.0000. .00... .0000 00.....0E00 000 00.500.50.000 t0>.5

 

mhu<0s= ...—ammo uz teammg

 

 

138

 

 

 

.00... .x00 00. 0. 03000
0. 0000 .0500E00 00 .. .003 4. -50.0.0 >00... 0000. 0... 00 0.003 00. 0.5.5. 000 m0.50..00
.0 .000 00. .00..0 0. .05000.00 0.0000.00 0 0000 0.00. 50.0.0 00. a .< - 50.0.0 >00... 0000.. 0_ .0
0.80 0 - 00.2. .030 0000 . 03002
>..00 00. 00.0. 0.00 0. .... .0550... 00 00.0 000 00.00...00000 003 w0.0..00 00...0 .00..0...0 00..
..00E000E0 ..00 0 00 000 .0. ..0>>>.0 00cm 0. 0000 003 ...0.000E 0>M.= < ......000. 0.0.. 00..0>.0
003 .000. 000.0. 0.003 00....0E00 000 00..00..0000 ..0 .0 *3 .0000 am - 50.0.0 >03. 0000.. 0. .0

”00.00.05.

.m0..0>00. 0.003
00.m0.0.0.00 .0 .0055. 0.003 0... 00 .0 02.00 00. 00003.0. 00.0 >0E ._ .>....00. m0..0>00. 00. 0.
0... 50.0.0 00. E0.. 0.003 00. M00000 .0 .000 00. .000E. >00. ._ -00.....00. m0..0>00. .0 >....00..0>< .

.000 5080.. 0 020.0500 20.22:...
202004252 0...; 20.50.5200 0.0.0000 0.2

 

 

 

139

 

 

 

.88. ..< - .000... >03. 0000.. c. 000: 3.000500 0.8.0.00

 

 

 

140

 

 

 

.00...>..00 3.0.0000 0.003 00 0.000000 0 0. 00000.. 00 000 00...>..00 00....0E00 ..< .0
.000..0.00.00
0.003 0.05 0.00 000 000 0.003 00320 0.00.00. 000 00..000.00. 0023.0 00 0000 853.50. .0
”0.0E0xm

00.0.0000 0.003 00. .0 00.0.00. 000 00.50000 .0. 00.0 0.
.00000.00 0.0.. 00. ...000 000 0.0... 0.003 00.52.0000 0.0.0000 0. 00000 0.0 .00. 00...>.50 .0. 0..0.0
000.00. 000 00.000000 000000.00. .00. 000. .00500. 00.. 00 000 00.0 03>... 000 0.000000 50.0.0 00 .. ..
0.00. ... .zo_._.<¢...n_ ...—00.2.50. - 02.000020.
.002 r... 00..000. .000 05000000000 00. 000 00..0>.0 0.003
00..00..0000 .0 >...0000 00. 00..0.00E .0. 0.000. 0 00 00.00 0.0... .0000 .000 0.003 00.52.0000
00. 0. 00..0.000.. 000. 003 000.0>0. 0000. E0.. .000 .00.0>00. 0.03 .00. 0E0.. .0. E00. 50.0.0
00. 0. 000.0>0. >.0.00E 000.>0.0 ..00 0.0..0>00. 00. .00..0N...00E .0..< 0.00; 00.52.0000
00. 00..0>00. 000 000000 .0. 0.0E..00 50.0.0 00. 0. E0.. 00.. 0.0.0000 0 00.005 E00.
50.0.0 00... 0.0..0>00. 000 000000 0.003 00.50...000 .0. 0000 .000 0.0.0000 0 .0 00..00.0 00.
.03 .... -50.0.0 >03. 0000.. 0. .0.0E.0. .2500 50.0.0 00. 0050..0 .00. 050000 00. .0 000 .0

”0.0E0xm.
50.0.0 00. 00 00.0.0>.0 0.003
0.05 00.0.00000 .000 00. 00.00.000 .0. 00000 .000 0.0.0000 0.00.0 0. 00.500. 00 >0E 352.200 00... .N
....00 0.000000 ... .zo.._um.o 20:30:...

hzm2m0<z<i mhm<>> zo_b:thzouw N .2055 mi

 

 

 

141

 

 

 

..00. .0 000.2. .03. 080. 6.0.00. 00..0>00.
>0.000 00. >0 00.u>00. ..0..0.00. .0 00>. 00. 00 00.00 ..0... 000.00 000 500.00 ...5000...»
...00.000 .00..50.0 ..0.0E 0.0>00. 0. 000.000 0.00. 50.8.0 00. ...0 -50.8.0 >03. 0.09. 0. .0

0.8. .< 30.2. .63. 0.00. 000.60.

.03 3.03 0.000 ..03 E0.0>0 000 00....000. .02, 00.0 00. 0. ..00 00..0>00. ..03>.0 0 ..0.0._

.>..0.0.> 508.0 00. 0. .0.....00. 00..0>00. .0 >....00..0>000 0. 000 00.5.0.0 0.0>00. 0. 0.00 .00

>..0...0. .03 ..< - 50.8.0 >03. 0.0..... ...80 000... ..00.0 00...000.00. 0300.000. .0..000.
0.000 ..03 E0.0>0 .00 ..0..0.0E 00.0>00. >.00E0.00 0.0 ..000.0 000 0.0.0000 00.02 .0

".0.0E0xu

.0... 508.0 00. 00 00.0.0000 0..03 .00500x0. .0 00>. 00. .00000
.00. .0....50. 00..0>00. 000 ..0.000 0..0.5 00.50...000 >...000. 0. 0000 >00. .050...000 00.0 ..

20.25.2008 0 205252.23 5.30.
5.504252 ...; 20.500520. 0..0.0. 02

 

 

 

142

 

 

 

.88 .<
- 50.8.0 >03. 0.00. ..<-508.0 >03. 0.00.. 0. 00.0 00.0 .00E00000E 0..0.5 00.50...000 .0

.00... .x00 00. 0. 0.500. 0.0 .00.0 2.50 0.00.0. 0.5... $0.050...

00.0 .230 00. .0 .0>.50..00 000 ..000 00. .0000 ..050..00000. 00. 0.00000 .

.0..0.5 00.00.5050 .0.
.0..0E00 000 .0 ..0..0E00 .00.0...0 .0 00...>0.0 - .0.....00. 000.3. 000 00..0000 0...-00 >..000. .

..00.0 00..00 ... 00..0>000. .0. ...o .0 RE .00. - ..000 .000.000000. 0..0.5 00..00 .

.0... 50.8.0 00. .000 0.00..0>0 .00..00 00. 00 00.00 .....000.
.0 ..000>.0. 0.00. .0.0>00. 0..05 00....00.00 ... 00.50...000 00..00..0 .0 .000.00. >...000. .

.000.000 50.8.0 0 .0 000. ..0000..00 00..00.0.000 0 00...... .

n .008 0.000.
.8- .8. .0080 00..0.000.. 0030:. 020 250 3 0008058 0.0 .o 005. .302 0000.. 0029,...
..050..00000. ..0 .0 .0.....0..000.0. 00. .00..00 .00. 00.0 2.50 0 0.000.0 0.000. .050...000 00 .0 .N

20:2sz:30.; a zo_._.<x._.._z_¢<o< P000010

égu<z3wuh<izoﬁ00mhzou N 00.0. 05

 

 

 

143

 

 

03.0.00... 0.0.. ... .0 0.00.5 8.00.5 0000. ".....ucu. ...o. I .00.0? .00.0 ..<

 

 

 

 

3.00—0.000 00..0>00.
00..0>00. .0. 0.0.09 0. .00..00 .0 ..00—0.000 03.6.0 .0....0 o. n . £0.00. a o. . . ...} 3.03.0300. 2.0. 0. 0025.0
.o..0E00 .30... ... ..0.0E ..0 ...0000 30.02 0.500. "0.0000... .00. m .305. 00.0.
.0......000 00..0>00. 0003 0. 0003 32 00:980.. too; "35?. 00.03on .03 N— 00.0. .0003 ..00.0
0005 0.00.00: 000.0 6.00. .0. .50. 0. .06.. .80... 0.00.00. 000.. 0.0 5.00... a... .....oiEb. .0. 00.00. .00.0.
...0 00..0>00. 00.02. ... .E.o. 0.00.00: 32 00.200:
..00.0 0.0>00.. .300. .0. .0500 .50. .50.. .0 .3000. a. 0.00 0.03. 00.0.... "0.0.60. 000. 0.0.300 .0 .0E.. >00... .0 0.30.. .00. 0 .0300 00.5.0...

 

v.0 .0000 .0... 0.0.0000 0. .00 000

.003..E .o .0503 >00 0... ..00.0 0.0.0.50 0:00. .003... "0.08.0...

      
 
   

.uﬁnEau 2.0.... ... 0.00.5 .3095 0.50. n .0004 33.5.02 00.59.00...

 

 

03.0.0 .0. 30:00 00 000. .0......0 0.3. .000... >0 o>oEu¢ 00.0030. 0E0... .onEF "000020. ... .00 m «.0000 08>. 02.0.0000
..00 000.5 ..00.0 0. :08... ..00.0= 0.0.000. 50.50502 00..0>00.. 000.5 .00.0>uo¢ ...—0. o mEEEu 0003

 

 

 

 

 

E. a 0.8.3. .0.... S 008.... .02 8. 3.01.0.3 ES. 0..0.0...

 

 

”.2305... 00:000.. 000 000.0E .030..0 ..00. 60509.0 30.5.0.0 0..0.5 >...000. 3.000 00.2.2.0. 00...
H02:023.. 0z< ...<.O0._0 .0......» .5009... 00.5050

.0... 00. 5000090. 00.80 00 ....5 ..0t0.0E 0.0300500303300000 .0 ...... 0

00.000. 2.00.0 0.. ....5 ..00.0.000 00..0>00. ..< 0

.00.0 50500002 3.0.5 00. 0...... 000.00 050.0 ..00. ..0 0.0. 9.0.0 0. 00509.0 00 ....5 5.0030000... 000 0

..00.0 00..0>00. 00. .0
.00. 0 00.5.0 000 00.0 .00E000002 3.02. 00. .0 >000 0 005 .00.E.0 .00.0.0 ...5 8.050.000 00..0>00. 00. .0....00 .0E00 5.02.0800. .500 0000 .< a

.00..me >.0.0. 0000 .0 00.05000 00. .0 00..00.0 00 ...5 .0...>.50 00..0>00. 000 :0..00>0.0 3.0.5 a

“2.3... 29.50.23.200

.0...-00 00.0.0000 3.0.5 0... .0 .00.0.5 >0 .80 0.00. .0. 00020. .0 0.0>00. ....5 508.0 ...:

n..00.0 .20200<z<2 0.0.4.3

000 000.. 20.00.0300 00..0>00.. 03000.30 <3 ..00: 00.0.5. 0000 50.55.02 .508...

00.5.5.000 ..00 ..050..02 $000500

 

 

...0.~8~ >.0000 00.x .00.0... 00.0 .00E00000.2 0..0.5 00.50...000 0.0E0.

 

 

144

 

 

 

90.0... 0..

0000.00.00.60 m. .
0000.0..< 5.0.00 0..
20.05.00 m. .

.02 30 u... .0 .8000 500 0.0088 ...? 30.000030... ... 000

>000EOU 0000.03.50 NVX 03.0.0 0... .0 ..8000 coco—5.000: 000 :83... 000.3800: 2.. “.0...... 00.00.00.000
3 :5 .230 a; .0230 05 ... 39...». .2... 895...... 3 :5 ”5.30585 9522 I caccaoo

2. 3.20 .230 ...... .o 0.329.235 32.2.. 000.. 352; s .50.? 020mm. .38.... .35 022.002
38.2. 00..... an. .038... 3 02.000. 2.. .2 .N 0.2 5.20 5.3 85282.. ... 0.3500 3:02.28

N .Cn >0 000.000.... 0.0.00.0. .00.—.00.0...0. 8.03 00..00.0.000 0... .0 300500000. 0... .00..00 00.0 ......

000.6 N.—
..0000 000 8.03 000000.000 .0 £000.... ..00 0.0. 300800.060
9.00.02. 00. 00.5.0.0. 0. 0.000.... .. 000 .00..00... 0mm.— o... .0 300000.00 0 m. .../.30 0.. ... .....000 00..00.0.000
000 00.0.0800 .0 500.... 0.... ...—0000.. 00. 3.30.000. ...—2.50. 950...... .0oﬁow0002 2.03 00..00.0.000 0...
.0 0000.00.00.05. .0. .0090... 0 0.00.0.0 o. .. .023. 00... 0.0.0.».0002 3.03 00..00.0.000 00. ..0 0.00.00 00...

325.. ...

0000000....— . 00.8%

.0.... .4 18?... 0:5 35.
00... .0008 000.). 8.0.5 00.305300

 

 

xxxxx 52 0.4.2..
b.0089. 00..00.0.000 N .CA 0...... .00.0...

 

 

145

 

 

 

.3055. Nm

mucoEuhzvum _ .m
33:33.60 n guuom
cousuoxm md
magnum 2
ESE—Goa _ .N
5535529:— N 539%

:::~ .4. I 39?...— »w:..» 3st

 

 

Ada-99M ﬂaw—A.— wn—QEQ “:62 9am“?! u-annfzmﬂco

3.5—:90 9:532:30 Nkrvn

xxxxx .oz 80.3...
9:2. 3.55

 

 

146

 

 

 

...< - “8.85 253 9.8.. 2: .... 85% 8%; 2:
3.53.65 6.32 ho mEmem cm .0... mcsm uxm: m5 5 56% .ummmzﬁ can 338 63862 63.9.6
& van @8233. 333 553.528 .33 5o ESP. «>58 cm ESP—«E 230% 362325 2? .m

29:95:38 w zoFéEzEE Bung:
Euzugzgmhﬁ; 295:5.sz a :85 a2

 
 

 

 

147

 

 

 

Anocu .< - “3.85 33m 33V 39.... EmEEzm cons—=33 3mm; couusbmcou

 

433.553 cum; .2.: .8 uou...» £5 Suva: v.3 833:2...
~ 20.23% raucoE 05 .2099. .occocoa 30E of.

.832. gaggaa $3.2. 03.: EHEIHHn-IMMHHIHNHHI $3.3
Mr L! r1_II..._..Il..Ibl...bIl. ....Il... II. V. A .... “III I: w... will .Bilgw Ill N! u
Iaiailqzll‘: I ., 3H.
.. . aaaai—dir.u. 35
5'... gainiain .. ..
IMMIIIHHHIIUIIHM'H m. 3."...

     
  

 

 

 
   

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

jokes“ g
V-!— E: ...—Id
1.3... 82811.-
Sa Ilﬂmﬂmﬂﬂq
9 a 58... .32 u...
a... :12 g I:
m 8.8 8.: 8.3 9.8." .3388!
5. !6 8... 9...: 2.3 Bald ink 88 .....uﬂ.
8 n
2 1
I34.
5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3

 

7.
' N
0':

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l.‘:l:lg
B
-
"\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
g1 01- IiiiDD H
.55.; 3. 111.36 I 3.3..
I

 

 

:1;
@1T1T:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

T:
g
3
'0

§lv§§_IIhl_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

148

 

 

 

 

.5605 8 two. 5mm .8 uoawo wasuﬁmm 2: E08 as... >95 m 5.5, SEE—808 cum...
9.: new 33828 05 3.505 ..maEBa 2: $5 ...me 3:0 0H... .g 3268 van maﬁa .533
.6 395m .3 62.8 32%....6 =5. .mpEBa 2: 3.853;... $.86 930 3 36384. ”@3886

.53 $5 05 82:2: van .5353 EmemmcmE 333 33.33 2: 3:350 35 93¢th .
9.2mm mEESm F- m2 .3 53m 358“. .650 :58 um>wEum $335... ..8 285.232 .
.382, 835558 ho 9.3 E 38 E982 ho 5.535838 .
.3238 .23: van 8% .33 5.? mega @3530 38; yo >553:
....cucm.tm.u>u8 .383 80 33 .3395“ .33. 33 05 F. 5523.3 33; coBuEumcou .
.332... >mE tumb £5 .8 mucmEEScm. :o.53:mE=uoo
"SOON nmmd mucoEESUm: co.53:mE=uoo .m

.ABON < -688“. 25% 3an Emma “3.3.5 «5 3 P. BEBE can £85833...
5.58:8 333 9: 3538 .umuﬁmcmm 3mm; .8 #595 .2: 83:33 9.232
3mm; on... .35? masses 9: new 5.58:8 8mm; 2: 3 53m 83 5E; .cozumzou

3mm; .8 5383.9 8me «5 0238a .85ch Em: 2: ...< $3.85 .63...“ 83.. «5 c. .m
”mEmem

.mmmca mFEcmE 30.83 2: mat—6 32:8 35:8
new amatEnsm 553$th 9H3 ho am... 3839.. a 3.9% 3 3.53.. mg >2: hequumcou 9:. .v
zo_._.<._.zm2=uoo w 20.521.52.29... Puma”...

 

h2m2m0<z<§uhm<>> zo_._.u=m._.m20u N ...—ammo m2

 

 

149

 

 

 

. .33 3. ..00.0 «E. 0.3.0 0. 00000: 0.. >0... «05.2.00 0.5.0.000...

0..02. 02.003200 0.0.6.000. .8 00..00.0.000 .0:0....0_00 .0000 0.... m. .0.... 00...; 00.0500.

900.. .... 0.0.3.5.. 0 .0 ..00 .0 0.... ..0 0.00..0>0 m.0..0.0E ma...m_x0 0.0 0.0... 30.00 ...00.....0
3.0.000... m. ..00.0 o. ..0 .8 00.3020 0.....02. :0....0E00...0..00..m..00 .0 .0>0. .30 0... 3.5020... .n

.308 :53.

0.0300. v... .N - ..00.0 «.2 0.030200 .m..0...0.00.00 0... 30...... >..00...0E0.m>m ..00 3:00. .00.0... 0... 0m00

... ..00.0... ...... 0... .... 60.0.0.0... .0: m0; .0... 0.82.. 00..0>.0 0.82. .0 E0000 0... .0 :0..00.......000
0 0.500. ...... .0.00..m..00 0... .3 00.08 .0 0.82. m....0000. .0. ..00.0 0H: 3... .0... $00.00. .0

zo_._.<._.zm2...uoa w zo_h<~_._.m_z.<<o< PUmﬁomn.

#2330423... 5.9.3 20....UDEhZOU N ...—ammo ms.

 

 

 

150

 

 

 

.ABON .0.00. 3.0-00 00.0.0000 0.0.02. .0 000>. .00.0...0 .0. 0.0.000 0.0.02. 0... 000 .0.00..0.000
0... 0003.00 0000.0 0.03 0.00..000 0.0.0000 ..00 00.00.0003 0. ..00.0.0 00..0.0.00. 0H... 0 00 .0

 

...E0.00.0 000.. 0000 0 00.>0.. 0. .0..000.00 0.0 00..0.00000 00
.00E..EE00 .00> .0000..00.00 000 .0. 00000E. 00 >0E 000.. .00....000 0. .00 000.0 .8 0.0.000000.
0.00 00 ...2. E0.00.0 .000.000000. 0.002. 00..00..0000 00. 5.2. >.0E00 0. ..0. 00... 0.0.00..00000m

.00.0>00. 00 ....2. 0.300.000 0.0000.00 000 .0.0E 6.0.0000 .0002.

0.... 0.0.. 00.02.00 0E3. 0.... 000.. 000 0.0000.00 ..0.0E 6.0.0000 .0002. ”0.0.3.05 00.2.2.8 00.
.0 0000 .0. 3.0.00 0.300.000 0>.. 00.>0.0 ...2. .0.00..000 00... .0.0.00E00 0.0.0000 0. .0 00300.0 000
00>. .0..0.00. >0 03.00 00 0. 0.002. 00..00..0000 ..0 00..000. 50.080 0.0... 0.0.00.0 .005000002
3002. 00..00..0.000 0...0000. 3.0 .....2. >.0E00 0. .0.00..000000 00. .0 >.._.0.000000. 00. 0. ....

 

 

 

.ABQN. ..<-.00..0.0 >030 0000.. 00 0000 0000000. 00000 0002. 00.0.0. - .230 .0
”0.0.00.0...

.00000. ...02. 0..0.00..000000 0... 0. .230 .0 3000.0..000. 00. 000.00. >00. .0.00..0000 00... ..
0.0202053. ... 00.05.0200

HZm£m0<z<<< m...m<>> zOPUDmhszu N ...—ommu as.

 

 

 

151

 

 

 

Ahoou

< - .000... >030 0000. 0.0050203. 0.0000

.. - 8.03.5 ”8.0000 22.0

 

.000..000
.x00 00. 0. 00000000 0200.0 000.
.00.0 0. 502.30 002.000 .00.0
0.0 0.00 0000 .00.< ..00500000
0.002. 00..00..0000 0. 00.0>00
0. 02.000 0.0.0000 0 00.03 .0000
.000..00...0000 .00.0.0 00. .0 ..00
0. 0.0.. 02.000 0000:0500 3.0....00.
0.0050203. 0.0000 ..- 00.0.30 0.
3.... 5.000000. .0.00..000000 .0 ..00
00 050502000. 000.. .0 020300..

 

 

 

K006225005 . 20.P<.>u¢mm<

Ewing—505. 02.20_mm_<$<ou

04313.; muz<zwhz_<2 oz< 0.520 u¢<Am

02.02.9350 oz< 02520.52;

<h<o”Huz<zuhz=szn=6<782h<¢w90

0.0sz3000 010qu hUmamn.

02.2515

03090.04... ...Uéhzou

mzoggnguo Shgm

USP—.200 “.0 20.53090 mut< 020-5....rmm30 oz< 020.000 0.03001...—

cho 5
con we
can 5
00h 5
ans 5
0N5 ..o
c K 5
won 5
Che we
96 5

50.20.00. 024 ﬁeﬂgﬁgnﬂiilnli. £200.05 I205
llllffffffn I I :85 9.0... 00003.2 000.200 200.0...2. 2.00.2. 0am:

I I I on I I 2202032.... 0.33 200.000.0200

00.5.0. 02.. ﬂoEza0I>gnaiu .ﬂﬂiiiigﬁaauI
002000.00 02.. 029.500... .0008
0200.00.02. 02... 00.0..
0.5.2000
029.300... #5022052.
20.505028 02.000 5.200 2.2. 00002.
020.020...

.8...
805
~35
0.0.5
Own .0
5— .0
8:0
165

050.200.0002 00.0200 - . 20.0.2.0
. oE:.o> - 0.0350 .o 0.00..

..005000005 0.002. 02.02.38

.0. 02.000. 0...0000 0 ....2. 500502000”. .0330 H. - 020.20 .0 ..00 0. 2.0.00 00.0..00... ”0.050....

.00.0.0 .0 050502000. .0330 0... 50...

0.0.00..000000 .0 3.2.5.3003. 0... 0. 002.000.0000.
.230 .0 30050.53. 0... 000.00.. >05 .0.00..0000 0.... .N

mkzmsmmu.‘ w m...0<¢._.z00

 

HZmEmU<z<E ”.....m<>> 290.021.5200 N ....oumu

mi

 

 

 

152

 

 

 

.GcON ...:ng 3.5-5 $363 .6 8a? 2888:. 9.5.9... new wczumzou 5 36.”. x83 05 335.58 8
...SvdEau 3mm; .3: mummzmcm. maotg E mcmv. 8.22: 8% 2:05 3.2528 9:. ....Bumbcounam
m5 9.53:8 .8 8.39. .83: a ma :3 8.85m... xoa .03 van 3839. 9:52. ESE. ”mEmem

.88 55;.

3.8.6 226 Sean $3.03 8m.u ucm couumbcounam m5 953:8 .8 382.88. £ 363.28 2:. .N
...mE 5.5855: 35

9: 9:535 223 35.8 new cozumzou 3mm; .8 3.5. m5 :0 83.». 333% 2:27. 65.8.3 38... .F

hzuzuu<z<2 «0.5.2.5083 w mzo_._.<¢un_o ad...—
.mou:m #63333
9: E :38... ...: 3.53. 5.52333 2:. 4:.ch wﬁ Ea... 383 2: 95.02.. E08 3533.
mmcsﬁ u5 £33m $8 a «Eng 3 3835 v.95 m.3um.ucoun:m 2: 55:85am. 3.2.3.
9: .6 tan. 2. .53 ucmEmmmcmE 33; 5.53323 9.: metamEmEE .3 3.58: mmcSmm
2: 32:23 2 nouumbcounam 9: 8.53. an? 36:529. 8: ...o $8.85 33m 0.9.3.. 5 .n

.854, 86: 9: E :26...
8 £03. cozumzou 3mm; 35:0... .8 3552.53”. .2050 J - c0555 5 EmEmwmcmE
3mm; casuabmcou .8 sebum...“ 8:33 a 82:2: 333.828 9.: ...o -5985 25% $3.. ... .m

”mmEmem

.ﬁoom d - 588a 33m 9.3. 3550.53. 3.2.3.
9: no t8 8 .mo. 33; cozuzbmcou 2: 3:53 3 Ecuumbcounzm 2: 8.53. >mE .Susbmcou 2F .m

mEmEmu¢O< w m._.u<m._.20u

 

#233942; ukm<>> ZOEUDEMZOU N .5055 m2

 

 

153

 

 

 

.32 .o -88... .63..
883 3.081 96.8... 333 8.83.88... .8 ...:mEmtaumm ......Enam 39:3

8.8.» .80.

8380.8 a 8 £8.88. 83 8wm>ﬁmv 8.968. 0.83 .0 .3888 30H
.88 ... 98.9.8. .2.. 883.8. 8.268. 0.83 .0 >588 .809

.80. ... 358 2... 88.8.8 Son .8380. 0.83 .0 388:0

.80. ... 388 2... 8.88.8 Eon .8838 v.83 h.c 58.80

2.8 ... 0.83 ..o 58.8.. .308

0.83 .0 .88 8.8880

bowoﬁo 38.82

Advid‘trixo'b'

2.8....88... 8.26:8 o... 8.208 .883
882.88 8... 8.8.8. .8 3.08. 0.888 8.308 ...o8. D6 838 m .885
£88.98 .8 888.38 88 5.3 2.8.52.8 .388. .880... .8888. 88>? .m

mﬂ<h>=2m3m

 

 

154

 

 

 

.80. .o - 80.8... 2.30
0000. 0..0.0... 000.00... 0.00? 08.03.30... .8 0.:0E0._:_.0~_ .0...—:0:... 0.0E00

.00.0 .000.0w0000. 0.003 0.0... 09.300 .00 .0 .000 308......0 .07.

0.003 ..0 00%. 0000

.0.. 0.003.000 08.08.00 ..0 .000 0..0.0... 0.000 0000000000.. ..00 w0....00m
...0...0>0 0.0 000.. w0.00.. ..00 w0..00.. 0. 0w0.>0m

.03..0.00. M00008. an 000.. w0.00.. ..00 w0..00.. 0. 0M0.>0m

0.8.0.00. 00.0000. 0..00 0000>0M

0300.0... 00m0>30 8.0.. 0000.300

600.00%0000. 0.003 00 ....3. 30000... ..0 .000 3.0 .H.

0.003 h.0 00%. ..000 ..0 0.003.000 00..00..00 ..0 .000 ..00 0000

w0.00.. ..00 w0..00... 000.00. A800 .00 .000. 30000... 0.003 00 .000 00.00.00...
0.003 ...0 >...000.. 3.0 .H

0'

«5660806

.cxi

”w0.30..0... 0... 8.300. .00.0 .000.0w0005 0.003 m0..000.0.00..
.00... w0...000. 0w0.>00 .00 .0 .000 308......0 .00 ..00 00.0 .000.0w0000. 0.003
00 003 0.0:. ... 00 30000... 0.003 00 .000 3.0. 0.... 030...... “0.00.000 0:00>0. D000 .3

 

 

155

 

 

 

.ﬁoom
Nuv 5%. $35 2: 26:8 B .82. Adam 29:03 £5233 .nouumbcounamv 3302: =m 35 new
£8.85 9H,: m x 60.35 «5 55 «€5,865 cwﬁ a wagon 3228 3:05 .ouueumcou as... .o

.GSN :52: .058th Em: m5 3 9.253 333.3 8.53; SE
new #8 Run >mE MEF .35 uumhoa 2: 33:0 mean we 3 m5... >9: mFEOm ucm 2232.8 333 .m

.303 and mﬁtmume nun... ho 9.80.. m>._m 3 9.335533. «5 8.53.. go “.3.sz 9:2. 333
cozueumcou *0 EnoEm 2: Eat it an Bu: 3 >5: 523 gains can EcOmmE .mecou mcbﬁxm
go £903 «5 E xumb 39. ESE 330% 852638 8622833 .8 235.838 6509.3 33.... .v

.AnooN 4. $3.85 33m mmmuv £37. 88: m5 5 $505 mm 62¢ 35 2: ﬁts magi—:3 5 €9.33
2: Emma 3 89: 3mm; 253:6 .6 2m? Eamon Emma Eu: «5 .< - “8.85 33m 33 5 ”ﬁnger”.

.ABON UV 5 «285 new 5298

8 Emucmuctmazm 2.: mo 335m 2: 3 2528 339.6 m_ SE 226 3:33 “8.85 «5 b6 mmmuusm

2:. .Aooom 3: 80.5830 cozuabmcou u.o tag a $Eoumn .93 3.5 m5 .3 30.5230 55

mo mcEcmE .AmoON Sud .Bm 2:3.— voe .333 385ch .550 E uﬂmEESSu yo: ﬂ 3338
.o 338 E2262 an 3 3mm; cobueumcou “an... 33.6.08 3 wow: doccoﬂma Em: mg... .m

hzmimu<z<<< «Ohuékzoumam w mzo_._.<y_umo GAE...

 

......2m2mu<z<i mkm<>> zo_hu:m._.mzou N ....ommu m2 .

 

 

156

 

 

  

 

58 < - 3.35 25% 8Q 22:38 39: 9E3 38% 226

..........

 

 

157

 

 

‘ .,...Wx.m~.‘—.N

.z ,

ABON. 4- wumMoE >vsum..mwmuv mac—“Nina

  

,1

gm Wmccau ....totw (<26 ,

 
 

 

158

 

 

 

 

.395 a: 3mm; 32...:5 3 so... :2: ...i. .6 832.. .2 3 Ema; :95 9:855 a.
55mem
.0825 um
5.55:2 253 5:5 55.55 3 .55: :35: 53:92 .253 m5. 555:5 55 5555:. 5 5N5
:wN._E.55 5:28 5 5m: :53 53:52 5 :52 :95: 55 :53 55282.8 5 5553 25 55:8: .m

.325 :9 259:8 «55:8
5 25:2 3 «5:53. :5 22:85.55... 55 5:: x53 3 :5: m m: 55:... .253 5.82528
.6 52:8 5535 25 .6 55 553558 55:05 :5 ....mthE 5555.58 5 5.58.5: .N

.AcooN .659 5:35: .523 5.? 5x0: 55:: 8583:5555 .5
5:... 58 98 :5 253 5.59.5: 8::2 3 :5: 5:5 8:85 9:35: 53:22.52: 5 mm: .a

.325 2. men? 3.3% B 3
>82 :5 5585855 .5 5.7.: 3 55:5: .53 52:8 5 555:2 55mm; .5535 0H... m :0 .m

556:5
.5>.55.Eo 8.85 9H... =m5>o 25 :55: :8 5 55.85
55 :_ 355 5:35: 5: :8 5355.58 5.5 :55 55:5 3 5:55 .55.: ... .525: 5.52558
555:: :2: :8 5:: 2.5.5 25; 55:2 35 50: 555588 m:_:::: 535: 5 558552:
555558 :5 58:85 65.55:. m:._:::: 535: 5 85.5 5258:2558 5 2:3:
5:95: 25 :5 5:26 25 .....me B M. 555558 a 5.. 5.9. 5:55 < .203 ..m .5 5:: .38

.5 5 .5533: 52:9. 5 555:5 2mm; 5 5:25 55 25:2 3 5 5:5 5 55:2 :EE 2: 5 5:0 .F

nmkjmm . «chug—.5200 mmzho

h2m2m0<z<£ mkm<3 zo_hunm._.mzou N bony—u m2

 

 

 

159

 

 

 

..Bow . 7.: :25>.: 5553 55:55:00 5 55.55 055.52 : 5.52:5 :_ 5:55 55.85 5:: :55:
5.95:: 5.5... .5u::>:: c.— :55.:0.:u 53 65.53: 5: 05 555:: 5.555 5:5 :5 5555:.—
EC 53 50.5550 5.55558 5:: 50.: 5553 55595 5:: ...u - 55.8.5 >55 55?. :_ ”555:5.

5:55:00: 5.555500 5:: :_ 5.5585 5: :.:0:..... 555255.. 5.552: am: 5:... .m

5.55505: 5553

5555.: ”.0 5.553: 55.55.55: 5.. 5:55:55: :55 :0 2:3: 5: 25% 50:55:85“...

525555.. 5:: m: 5855: m. 5:... 5:55:00: 555553 5:: .: :555>._: 5: 05 5553
n.0 SSE 5.55505: :2..::2 5:5 5:35: 05 5:555: m: 5: .555 n: 5:: 5555: 0... .:

555.55 555; an 5:: 5:55 5552 5.. 5:5 0.». 5.55:: .5. 55:2 5 55:05:55..."

5.555 55.55 5:55 05 5:35: 5:5 555:5 05.: 5:0 55:55:05 5:... 5.5.5:

5:: c.— m.:.c555 :0:... h.0 5N5 5:5 5.5.—5:55:55 5.. :55: 5:: .5525: 5:5 :55 5555:5500

:.:0:.». 55:55:00 5:... 55:55:25 :55. :. 5:55: 5:58 5:052 5: 55: 50: 0: 5:5
:5: 5553 205 5555.: 05 32:. 2: :05; 55.555 55:: 5.5.—EH: :8 55:55:00 5:... .:

"555:5

55.5.55 5:: 5550: 05 5:55:05 5.53 05 55:
...3 555558 :5 5:35: 5:5 :50: 50.555: 5:53 552.... ..0 mm: : 5555 05 5:5 :_ ..

:55:5:5m 55:3 .30: 5:: ..0 L555:...5 .5 Km: 55>.5 Hmauozn. 20.30 5.. zo_._.<>Ozz_ .v

 

 

160

REFERENCES

161

REFERENCES

Arain, F .M. and Pheng, L. S. (2006) “A Framework for Developing a Knowledge-Based
Decision Support System for Management of Variation Orders for Institutional
Buildings”, ITcon Vol. 11, Special Issue Decision Support Systems for
Infrastructure Management, pg. 285-310, http://www.itcon.org/2006/21

Amor, R. and Faraj, I (2001) “Misconceptions About Integrated Project Databases”,
ITcon Vol. 6, pg. 57-68, http://www.itcon.org/2001/5

Augenbroe, G.L.M. and Pearce, A.R. with Guy, B., and Kibert, CK. (1998). "Sustainable
Construction in the USA: A perspective to the year 2010," Presented by CIB-W82
at the CIB World Congress, June 1998.

 

CICA. (2002). Industry as a Partner for Sustainable Development, The Confederation of
International Contractors’ Associations (CICA), France and United Nations
Environment Programme (UN EP), France.

http://www.unep.fr/outreach/wssd/docs/sectors/ﬁnal/construction.pdf (Viewed in
June 2006)

Fisk, W.J. (2000) "Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and
their Relationship with Building Energy Efﬁciency”. Annual Review of Energy
Environment, Vol. 25, pp. 537-566

Fisk, W.J. (2002) "How IEQ affects health, productivity." ASHRAE Journal, Vol. 44,
No. 5, pp. 56-60.

Fowler, KM. and Rauch, EM. (2006). Sustainable Building Rating Systems Summary,
Paciﬁc Northwest National Laboratory, operated for the US. Department of
Energy by Battelle. Completed for the General Services Administration (GSA)

Gottfried, D., (2000). “Sustainable Building Technical Manual”. Prepared by US. Green
Building Council, US. Department of Energy and US. Environmental Protection
Agency.

Green Building Alliance (GBA). (2003) "Shades of Green, Annual Report of Green
Building Alliance," pp. 1-12. Pittsburgh, PA: Green Building Alliance.

162

GVRD. (2004). GREEN CONSTRUCTION - Introducing Green Buildings & LEED® to
Contractors. Developed by Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD), Policy
and Planning Department, Ledcor Construction Limited, Build green
Developments, and Keen Engineering Co. Ltd., Vancouver, Canada.

Harding, L. (2005). “Specifying LEED® Under Public Bid.” The Construction Speciﬁer,
July 2005, 63-67.

 

Horman, M.J., Riley, D.R., Pulaski, M.H., Magent, C., Dahl, P., Lapinski, A.R., ”m
Korkmaz, S., Luo, L. and Harding, N.G., 2006, “Delivering Green Buildings:
Process Improvements for Sustainable Construction,” Journal of Green Building
1(1): 123-140

Houvila, P. and Koskela, L. (1998). “Contribution of the Principles of Lean Construction E

to meet the challenges of Sustainable Development”, Paper Presented at the 6th 4"
Annual Conference International Group for Lean Construction. Guaruja, Sao
Paulo, Brazil, 13-15 August 1998.

Jackson, M. (1999). “Thirty Years (and more) of Databases”, Information and Software
Technology 41 (1999) 969—978

Kats, G., Alevantis, L., Berrnan, A., Mills, E., & Perhnan, J. (2003). The Costs and
Financial Beneﬁts of Green Buildings; A Report to Califomia’s Sustainable
Building Task Force. [Electronic version].
www.cap-e.com/open/NewsPrintable.cfm. (Retrieved on August 2006)

Kibert, C]. (2005). Sustainable Construction — Green Building Design and Delivery. lst
Ed., John Wiley, New Jersey.

Khosla, N. (2007). Development of a Framework to Assist Owners in Deciding to Use
Sustainable Design Practices for Institutional Buildings , School of Planning
Design and Construction, Master of Construction Management, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI. '

Klehm, C. (2006). “LEED for General Contractors and Construction Managers.” United
States Green Building Council (U SGBC) workshop, Arlington, VA, July 27, 2006.
Karhu, V., Keitila, M., and Lahdenpera, P. (1997). Construction process model:
generic present-state systematisation by IDEFO. VTT, Espoo, Finland, 190 pp.

163

Kuehn, T.(1996), Construction/Renovation Inﬂuence on Indoor Air Quality. ASHRAE
Journal, 1996.

Lapinski, A. R., Horman M. J. and Riley, D.R.(2006) “Lean Processes for Sustainable
Project Delivery” Journal Of Construction Engineering And Management

LEED. (2006). Checklist. www.usgbc.org, retrieved in November 2006.

LEED. (2005). “LEED® - NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction &
Major Renovations.” Version 2.2(2005) USGBC.

LEED. (2002). “LEED® - NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction &
Major Renovations.” Version 2.1(2002) USGBC.

Mackinnon, L.M., Marwick, D.H., Williams, M.H. “A Model for Query Decomposition
and Answer Construction in Heterogeneous Distributed Database Systems”, J.
Intelligent Inf. Sys. 11 (1998) 69--87.

Marden, K. D. (2003) “Learning to Build Green - A Construction Management
Perspective.” Cornerstone, Associated General Contractors of America, Houston,
Spring 2003.

Matthiessen, Lisa F. & Morris, Peter. (2004). Costing Green: A Comprehensive Cost
Database and Budgeting Methodology [Electronic version].
www.dladamson.com/publications.html. (Retrieved from Davis Langdon Seah
International website on September 30, 2006.)

Mogge, J. W. Jr. (2004). Breaking Through the First Cost Barriers of Sustainable
Planning, Design, and Construction, School of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Doctor of Philosophy in Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

Needy, K.L., R. Ries, N.M. Gokhan, M. Bilec, and B. Rettura. (2004) "Creating a
framework to examine beneﬁts of green building construction." In Proceedings
from the American Society for Engineering Management Conference, October
20-23, Alexandria, Virginia, pp. 719-724.

164

 

Pulaski, M.H., Horman, M.J., Riley, DR. (2006) “Constructability Practices to Manage
Sustainable Building Knowledge.” Journal of Architectural Engineering, 12(2).

Pulaski, M.H. (2004). Field Guide for Sustainable Construction. Partnership for
Achieving Construction Excellence, The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA and Pentagon Renovation and Construction Program Ofﬁce,
Arlington, VA.

Riley, D., Pexton, K., Drilling, J. (2003). “Procurement of Sustainable Construction "-
Services in the United States: The Contractor’s Role in Green Buildings.”
Sustainable Building and Construction: Facts and Figures, 26(2-3) UNEP Industry
and Environment, April — September 2003, 66-69.
http://www.uneptie.org/media/review/v0126n02-3/005- 098.pdf

 

Riley, D., F reihaut, J ., Bahnﬂeth, W.P., Karapatyan, Z. (2004) “Indoor Air Quality L
Management and Infection Control in Health Care Facility Construction”. CIB
World Building Congress, Toronto, CA.

Romm, J. J ., and Browning. D., 1994: “Greening the Building and the Bottom Line:
Increasing Productivity Through Energy-Efﬁcient Design,” Rocky Mountain
Institute Publication #D94-27.

Samaras, C. (2004), “Sustainable Development and the Construction Industry: Status and
Implications”, Carnegie Mellon University URL:
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/csamaras /. Pdf (Viewed in November 2005)

Shelboum, M. A. Bouchlaghem, D. M, Anumba, C. J. Carillo, P .M., Khalfan, M. M.
K.and Glass, J. (2006) “Managing Knowledge in the Context Of Sustainable
Construction”, ITcon Vol. 11, pg. 57-71, http://www.itcon.org/2006/4

Sweet J. (2004). “Legal Aspects of Architecture, Engineering and the Construction
process.” Chapter 26, 7th Edition. Published by Thomson Engineering, U.S.A.

Syal. M. (2006). “CMP -817: Construction Project Management”, Construction
Management Program, School of Planning, Design and Construction, Michigan
State University.

165

Syal, M. (2005). “Impact of LEED Projects on Constructors”. AGC Klinger Award
proposal, Michigan State University, Construction Management Program, School
of Planning Design and Construction, E. Lansing, MI.

Syal, M. Mago, S. (2007a). “Impact of LEED-NC Projects on Constructors”. Presentation
Package, Volume 3, William A. Klinger Memorial Research Award, 2006-07
AGC Education and Research Foundation, Michigan State University,
Construction Management Program, School of Planning Design and Construction,
.E. Lansing, MI.

Syal, M. Mago, S. (2007b). “Impact of LEED-NC Projects on Construction Industry”.
Project Report, Environmental Research Initiative (ERI), 2006-07, Environmental
Science and Policy Program, Michigan State University. Construction

Management Program, School of Planning Design and Construction, E. Lansing,
MI.

Syphers, G. Baum, M. Bouton, D. and Sullens, W.(2003). Managing the Cost of Green
Buildings. [Electronic version].
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/greenbuilding/Design/ManagingCost.pdf. (Retrieved
on August 2006)

Toole, K., Davies, D., Dell’Agnese, D. Vetterkind, P. and Falsetti, F. (2006) “Hunzinger
Construction Company LEED CI Remodel: Green Through the Eyes of the
General Contractor”, Journal of Green Building, Vol. 1, Number 4, Fall 2006. pg.
48-57, USGBC. (2006), United States Green building Council, www.usgbc.org
(Viewed in Nov. 2006)

United States General Services Administration (GSA). (2004) “LEED Cost Study”.
Prepared by Steven Winter Associates. Washington DC.

Vanegas, J and Pearce, A. (1997). "Sustainable Design and Construction Strategies for
the Built Environment," Proceedings of the 1997 NESEA Insurance Industry
Conference, Boston, MA.

Vijayan, A. and Kumar, A. (2005) “A Review of Tools to Assess the Sustainability in
Building Construction”. Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Toledo, Toledo,
OH 43606 Published online 28 January 2005 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/ep.10065

166

   

Iltljlllljjllljj