IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsrexx/v6y2014i1p115-142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Study of LEED vs. Non-LEED Office Buildings Spatial & Mass Transit Proximity in Downtown Chicago

Author

Listed:
  • Sofia Dermisi

Abstract

Although the number of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified office buildings continues to increase, research on their spatial distributions in comparison to non-LEED buildings and mass transit links need to be explored in depth. This paper focuses on these aspects using all the downtown Chicago Class A office buildings as the study area. The findings show that LEED buildings are 21% closer to each other, indicating possible proximity pressure. LEED-Gold buildings are also 18% closer to each other compared to Silver. Regarding mass transit, LEED compared to non-LEED buildings are on average 14% closer to a metro area commuter rail station (Metra) and 12% closer to a local commuter rail station (CTA). In addition, LEED and non-LEED buildings show some evidence of small group clustering in certain areas, while the econometric results indicate that buildings located along the most prominent office market street (Wacker Drive) achieved 12% higher LEED points compared to other LEED buildings. A similar result was experienced among buildings built after 1979 and those certified under LEED v.2009 (12% and 19%, respectively). Additionally, LEED-Silver buildings achieved a lower number of points compared to other certification levels by 20%.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofia Dermisi, 2014. "A Study of LEED vs. Non-LEED Office Buildings Spatial & Mass Transit Proximity in Downtown Chicago," Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 115-142, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsrexx:v:6:y:2014:i:1:p:115-142
    DOI: 10.1080/10835547.2014.12091862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10835547.2014.12091862
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10835547.2014.12091862?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsrexx:v:6:y:2014:i:1:p:115-142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsre20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.