90.1-2007 Exterior Lighting Allowance calculation

7 posts / 0 new
Last post

Table 9.4.5 includes allowance for Building Entrances and exits (W/linear feet) and Canopies and Overhangs (W/ft2). If a door has a canopy do you include the allowance for both the W/linear feet and the W/ft2 of canopy?

Thanks for any insights!

Christopher Jones, P.Eng.
Halsall Associates
Tel: 416.644.4226 * Toll Free: 1.888.425.7255 x 527 * www.halsall.com
Vancouver * Calgary * Sudbury * Burlington * Toronto * Ottawa
Best Workplaces in Canada, Seven Consecutive Years: 2007 - 2013
___________________________
A Parsons Brinckerhoff Company

______________________________________________________________________
NOTICE: This communication and any attachments ("this message") may contain confidential information for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you are not an authorized recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies.

Chris Jones
crollinjones's picture
Offline
Joined: 2013-12-12
Reputation: 0

Hi Christopher,

You are only allowed to include the allowance of one or the other surface
type (i.e. entrance or canopy/overhangs). You can pick the one that is the
most beneficial, but you can't include both.

Alex N. Chapin
Sustainability Program Engineer
SRI Green Building Certification, LLC
300 Northpointe Circle ? Suite 304
Seven Fields, PA 16046 ? USA

www.SRIRegistrar.com
achapin at SRIRegistrar.com
T: (724) 934-9000 x619
F: (724) 935-6825

Building Sustainability
This message and any included attachments are from SRI Quality System
Registrar, and are intended only for the addressee. The information
contained herein may include privileged or confidential information.
Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing or using
such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this message in error, or have reason to believe that you are not
authorized to receive it, please promptly delete it and notify the sender
by e-mail with a copy to mail at sriregistrar.com. Thank you.

Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:40:11 +0000
From: "Jones, Christopher"
To: "bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org"
Subject: [Bldg-sim] 90.1-2007 Exterior Lighting Allowance calculation
Message-ID: <25F861E695EA99478F9790869A57C7D4DC804C at catormsx02>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Table 9.4.5 includes allowance for Building Entrances and exits (W/linear
feet) and Canopies and Overhangs (W/ft2). If a door has a canopy do you
include the allowance for both the W/linear feet and the W/ft2 of canopy?

Thanks for any insights!

Christopher Jones, P.Eng.
Halsall Associates
Tel: 416.644.4226 * Toll Free: 1.888.425.7255 x 527 * www.halsall.com<
http://www.halsall.com/>
Vancouver * Calgary * Sudbury * Burlington * Toronto * Ottawa
Best Workplaces in Canada, Seven Consecutive Years: 2007 - 2013
___________________________
A Parsons Brinckerhoff Company

______________________________________________________________________
NOTICE: This communication and any attachments ("this message") may
contain confidential information for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying,
alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on this message
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you
are not an authorized recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message, delete this message and all copies from your
e-mail system and destroy any printed copies.

AChapin at sriregistrar.com's picture
Joined: 2012-11-12
Reputation: 0

Alex,
Thanks for the clarification!

Christopher Jones, P.Eng.
Tel: 416.644.4226 * Toll Free: 1.888.425.7255 x 527

Chris Jones
crollinjones's picture
Offline
Joined: 2013-12-12
Reputation: 0

Not to be contrarian, but I think there are cases where you can reasonably claim both allowances.

If you have a large illuminated/illuminating canopy connecting to a building entrance, such as with a with many hotel drive-up lobbies, and that canopy's lighting is illuminating (directly or indirectly) a substantial ground area separate from the main entry landing, then it would be appropriate to claim both allowances. I would not claim canopy credit for smaller canopies at entrances which only pool light on the vertical entryway and/or the landing area.

This falls squarely into the logic and guidance that allowances may only be claimed for illuminated surfaces - you cannot claim fa?ade lighting when it does not exist in the proposed design, for example.

If there is a hard rule disallowing this practice, I would submit I have yet to run into it with any reviews.

Regards,

~Nick
[cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB]

NICK CATON, P.E.
SENIOR ENGINEER

Smith & Boucher Engineers
25501 west valley parkway, suite 200
olathe, ks 66061
direct 913.344.0036
fax 913.345.0617
www.smithboucher.com

Nick-Caton's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-09-30
Reputation: 805

My view is that claim both allowances are technically not allowed, even in
the case indicated by Nick. However, it is difficult for the reviewer to
check for this in most cases (such as if there are both doors with and
without canopies, it may not raise a flag that both allowances for doors
and canopies are included).

Alex N. Chapin
Sustainability Program Engineer
SRI Green Building Certification, LLC
300 Northpointe Circle ? Suite 304
Seven Fields, PA 16046 ? USA

www.SRIRegistrar.com
achapin at SRIRegistrar.com
T: (724) 934-9000 x619
F: (724) 935-6825

Building Sustainability
This message and any included attachments are from SRI Quality System
Registrar, and are intended only for the addressee. The information
contained herein may include privileged or confidential information.
Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing or using
such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this message in error, or have reason to believe that you are not
authorized to receive it, please promptly delete it and notify the sender
by e-mail with a copy to mail at sriregistrar.com. Thank you.

AChapin at sriregistrar.com's picture
Joined: 2012-11-12
Reputation: 0

I agree with Nick, and I have done this many times. If there is separate canopy lighting from the entry door lighting, you can claim both.

Cory Duggin, EI, LEED AP BD+C
Energy Engineer I
TLC Engineering for Architecture
direct:

615-346-1939

crduggin's picture
Offline
Joined: 2013-04-16
Reputation: 0

All:

It's my sincere expectation that I haven't consistently taken this approach successfully so many times thanks to deception or unclear documentation. On the contrary, I believe this is the correct application of the allowances table for such applications. If anyone can find language to the contrary (disallowing multiple allowance types for entrances), I personally would be very much interested to learn more.

To take Cory's suggestion a step further, the following illustration is a photometric render I generated some years ago* for a canopy entryway study. In this scenario, interior vestibule recessed downlights provide some entryway landing illumination in the form of light through the storefront, but the general ambient illumination for both the entryway vertical plane and the approaching walkway is via indirect asymmetric uplighting along the canopy columns, reflecting off of the tilted specular bronzed paneling. While neither column fixture is explicitly illuminating the "main entry" in a direct fashion, they are together collectively illuminating the area under the canopy AND the main entryway. As the uplights are performing a "double duty" in terms of illuminated surfaces, it seems quite appropriate to allow for both a "canopy" (or walkway) and a "main entry" allowance. Thoughts?
[cid:image002.png at 01CFA287.9C2440E0]

~Nick

* My rendering skills have progressed since that time, but this particular example suits the point-at-hand particularly well!

[cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB]

NICK CATON, P.E.
SENIOR ENGINEER

Smith & Boucher Engineers
25501 west valley parkway, suite 200
olathe, ks 66061
direct 913.344.0036
fax 913.345.0617
www.smithboucher.com

Nick-Caton's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-09-30
Reputation: 805