Overview: Guideline Development
In the past 15 years, many international, national and regional sustainable building guidelines have been developed. In this region, the Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide (MSDG) was initiated in 1997 by Hennepin County with a grant from the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) and has been maintained by the University of Minnesota. The LEED™ Rating System (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Development) developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has emerged in recent years as a national standard with a high level of visibility and increasing market acceptance. Recently Green Globes™, used for many years in Canada, has been introduced into the U.S. as a sustainable building rating system and guide.
Sustainable or green building design is still an evolving field with rapid advances in knowledge, technology, and methods of measuring outcomes. Rating systems and guidelines continue to adapt and improve over time. The Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines attempt to address some fundamental problems that have not yet been resolved adequately in existing guidelines. For example, current guidelines such as LEED™ use prescriptive, point-based, and proxy measures that simplify both compliance and enforcement but in many cases do not connect to real human, environmental, and life-cycle economic outcomes and in some cases may lead away from desired results.
The development of the Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines is based on the following key concepts.
1. Reduction in Guidelines
Guidelines have been eliminated that are either already required by code or do not apply in this region.2. Required Guidelines
There are no points for meeting certain criteria. Guidelines are simply required when they clearly contribute to the desired outcomes. Some guidelines are recommended rather than required until their benefits to the State can be clearly demonstrated. In some of these cases, however, the team is required to evaluate implementing a recommended guideline to calculate the costs and benefits for their particular project. Where any inconsistencies may appear as to the extent of performance required or whether an item is recommended or required, the more strict (higher performing) case shall apply.3. Connection to Real Outcomes
Performance-based guidelines replace prescriptive measures wherever appropriate. The outcomes are documented on six forms (Forms P-1 through P-6) with embedded calculation tools. The purpose is to collect data on outcomes wherever possible and educate all participants in the process of determining outcomes. The performance indicators of real outcomes to be calculated in applying these guidelines (to be further developed in following phases) include the following:Project Lifecycle Costs
- Project capital costs
- Operation and maintenance costs
Human Impacts and Related Cost
- Health and Well-being
- Productivity
- Absenteeism
- Employee turnover
- Health care costs
Environmental Impacts
- Primary energy
- Global warming potential
- Waste production
Community Impacts and Related Cost
- Community infrastructure demand and associated costs
- Community assets contributed by project
- Economic impacts
- Social impacts
4. Relationship to LEED™ and the existing Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide (MSDG)
It is not the intent of The State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines to follow LEED™ requirements specifically, but wherever requirements are the same or similar, documentation required for these guidelines may be useful in achieving LEED™ credit. There is no guarantee, however, that compliance with these guidelines will result in a LEED™ credit. Refer to LEED™ sources for specific requirements and documentation required for certification. One benefit of making The State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines transparent to LEED™ and other guidelines is that LEED™ certification serves as one incentive to achieve higher performance than the basic requirements of these guidelines.