ID#2494 made on
SSc4.2 - Alternative transportation - bicycle storage and changing rooms
LEED BD+C: New Construction, LEED BD+C: Core and Shell, LEED BD+C: Schools, LEED ID+C: Commercial Interiors
We are requesting a ruling on an alternative approach to calculating required bicycle storage for SS Credit 4.2 for a professional hockey arena. Occupancy for the facility is expected to be as follows...
We are requesting a ruling on an alternative approach to calculating required bicycle storage for SS Credit 4.2 for a professional hockey arena. Occupancy for the facility is expected to be as follows: FTE: 115 Peak event staff: 700 Peak spectators: 18,500 Peak players: 25 Total: 19,340 Bicycle storage to serve all guests and staff who are likely to be at the arena during a sold-out game, would amount to 967 storage spaces if the credit requirements were followed as written. However, for reasons similar to those presented in the Credit Interpretation Requests dated 9/12/2007 and 10/5/2007 the project team feels that it is impractical to impose the same bicycle storage rules for this facility as for office buildings, namely: - Transient occupants tend to attend sporting and entertainment events in groups rather than as individuals. - This project has ample public transportation within 1/4 mile of the site. - The largest events occur in the evenings in the winter, times during which cycling is not ideal for safety and comfort reasons. - Similar facilities, such as the SF Giants described in the 9/12/2007 CIR, have demonstrated that current demand for bicycle storage is significantly lower than what SS Credit 4.2 requires. - The land required to provide permanent bicycle storage that has little likelihood of being used is not an ideal usage of the site. The project team proposes two ways of providing bicycle storage quantity that will adequately serve the realistically expected current demand for this facility while allowing for capacity growth based on peak demand. 1. To establish the current demand for transient occupant bicycle storage, statistics from a local non-profit cyclist organization whose mission is "to establish [a] city that is increasingly safe, accessible, and friendly to bicycle transportation" will be used. This organization states that the current rate of commuting by cyclists to the arena neighborhood is 0.8%. Applying this statistic to the peak occupancy stated above, 154 bicycle storage spaces would be needed for events. To accommodate 125% of this estimated demand, a total of 194 bicycle storage spaces would be provided using permanent and/or valet bicycle storage. Over time, peak demand will be monitored such that bicycle storage provided always exceeds demand by 25% until the maximum bike storage capacity of 5% of peak building users (or 967) is met. OR 2. To establish the current demand for bicycle, the team management will survey staff and season ticket holders to determine: a. The number (and percentage) that currently travels to events via bicycle b. The number (and percentage) who would consider traveling to events via bicycle if secure storage were provided at the arena Based on the survey results, enough permanent and/or valet bicycle storage will be provided to accommodate 125% of current demand. Each season, peak demand will be monitored such that bicycle storage provided always exceeds demand by 25% until the maximum bike storage capacity of 5% of peak building users (or 967) is met. For both approaches above, shower/changing facilities will be made available for 0.5% of all FTE occupants. If a valet service is used it will be implemented considering the requirements in the CIR ruling dated 10/24/2007.
The project team is requesting guidance on two alternative approaches to calculating the number of bi-cycles to be accommodated with secure bicycle storage for a professional hockey arena. The project has proposed 2 approaches, both resulting in the provision of 125% of the current estimated bicycle parking and storage needs, with regular monitoring to ensure available bicycle parking and storage exceeds demand by 25% until the credit requirement— providing bicycle storage for 5% of the building occupants—has been met. Approach 1 is based on the based on statistics gathered from a local biking advocacy organization, whereas Approach 2 is based on a survey of staff and season ticket holders. Either strategy is acceptable, as long as documentation of the process includes detailed calculations, and a description of how the current bike capacity was determined. The project team must also show how the bicycle storage will be monitored and demonstrate the capacity for future expansion exists, should it be needed, as stated in LEED NC 2.2, SSc4.2 CIR ruling 10/24/2007. The alternate strategy outlined is acceptable for large special events facilities only, because of the particular nature of these projects.
Related Addenda (Corrections & Interpretations)