Regional Credits To recognize regional issues, USGBC chapters identified six credits for each zip code in their regions to receive bonus points. Projects can earn four bonus points by implementing four of the six regional credits.

BOBENHAUSEN

In New Jersey, regional credits are available for development density, clean water, building reuse, brownfield redevelopment and stormwater control. “Teams are getting rewarded for pursuing things they might not have,” Kliwinski says.

Brower’s interior project in Connecticut is seeking three regional materials credits, 40 percent water efficiency and optimized energy performance for HVAC.

Changing Emphasis While projects are not changing overall strategies, emphasis is shifting to credits earning higher points and regional bonus points. “We have focused a bit more of our attention on the credits that have a bigger impact on carbon footprint and fossil fuels because of the way they weighted the point structure,” Kliwinski says.

“All credits are not created equal anymore,” Brower says. “The first thing I tell my clients on a new project is to forget about the rest of the check list. There are 100 points and 48 are in them are in water efficiency and energy. If you can’t get a significant number out of that group you are going to have to go after everything else to get certified.”

To Switch or Not to Switch All projects after June 27th are required to register under v.3.

“We registered all our recent projects under 2.2 before the June deadline,” Bobenhausen says. “We are analyzing projects and comparing their performance if we continue with 2.2 or upgrade to version 3.

Bobenhausen says his early impression is that there may be some advantages to certifying urban projects under v.3. A project such as the renovation of an existing building to house the 7,000-sq.-ft. Center for Sustainable Energy at Bronx Community College can achieve density and transportation points, he explains. “The Bronx project is also likely to include some photovoltaics. Those are all the items that achieve more points in v.3 than in version 2.2.”

In contrast, a 30,000-sq.-ft. medical office building in northern New Jersey will not be eligible for the “urban credits” but does expect to use some solar. “For projects that are not getting those 9 points chances are pretty good that we are going to be sticking with version 2.2,” he says.

BROWER

Brower has compared a number of his interior projects under both systems. “Any project in an urban area that is already doing some water-based scope and are actively chasing the energy credits fares well under v.3, either maintaining their existing rating or actually jumping a little. Conversely, if a firm is doing a project and not looking at water efficiency or energy conservation, it is likely to no longer comply or drop a rating category.

Most of Hathaway’s current projects are in urban areas and would pick up extra points for alternative transportation and development density. “But they would lose a couple of points in water,” he says. “So generally it is about a wash. You end up with more points but the same level of certification.”

For projects underway, switching to v.3 would result in extra work. “There is already a large administrative burden from the design point of view,” says Beth Greenberg, principal at Dattner. Switching projects would add to that and would probably not be of any significant benefit in terms of the point evaluation.”