## 3 Results
### Location and Transportation  
Figure 2 depicts the boxplot and [PERSON]'s \(\delta\) results in the LT category. According to the boxplot, the Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum projects were within a wide range (0-11, 1-13, 5-14, and 1-14 achieved points, respectively), whereas the median increased from level to level (3, 5, 5, 8, and 9  
Figure 1: The boxplot results and [PERSON]’s \(\delta\) effect size between possible and achieved points in the Integrative Process (IP) category. Effect size is considered to be: very high if \(|\delta|<0.147\) (bold font), high if \(0.147<|\delta|<0.33\) (bold italic font), medium if \(0.33<|\delta|<0.474\) (italic font), and low if \(|\delta|\geq 0.474\) (normal font). achieved points for Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum projects, respectively). According to [PERSON]'s \(\delta\), the LT category showed low achievement in all four certification levels. Table 2 provides median \(\pm\) IQR (25 th-75 th) and [PERSON]'s \(\delta\) results for LT credits. In four certification levels, six of the eight LT credits have similar [PERSON]'s \(\delta\) effect sizes between possible and achieved points. The LEED credits for Neighborhood development location, High-priority site, Surrounding density, Access to quality transit, and Green vehicles showed low achievement, whereas the Sensitive land protection credit had high or very high achievement. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Credit**} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Possible** \\ **Points** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Achieved Points**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Certified** & **Silver** & **Gold** & **Platinum** \\ \hline LEED for neighborhood & \multirow{2}{*}{16} & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) \\ development location & & 1.00 & 1.00 & 1.00 & 1.00 \\ \hline Sensitive land protection & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \(1\) & \(1.0\pm 1.0\) & \(1.0\pm 0.0\) & \(1.0\pm 0.3\) \\  & & **0.27** & **0.18** & **0.00** & **0.20** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{High-priority site} & \multirow{2}{*}{2} & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) & \(0.0\pm 1.8\) & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) \\  & & 0.95 & 0.82 & 0.73 & 1.00 \\ \hline Surrounding density and & \multirow{2}{*}{5} & \(1.0\pm 2.0\) & \(2.0\pm 1.0\) & \(2.0\pm 2.8\) & \(2.0\pm 3.5\) \\ diverse uses & & 0.95 & 0.86 & 0.73 & 0.60 \\ \hline Access to quality transit & \multirow{2}{*}{5} & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) & \(0.0\pm 3.0\) & \(3.0\pm 3.8\) & \(4.0\pm 2.8\) \\  & & 0.91 & 0.95 & 0.91 & 0.60 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Bicycle facilities} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) & \(0.5\pm 1.0\) & \(1.0\pm 1.0\) & \(1.0\pm 1.0\) \\  & & 0.82 & 0.50 & _0.45_ & _0.40_ \\ \hline Reduced parking & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) & \(1.0\pm 1.0\) & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) & \(1.0\pm 1.0\) \\ footprint & & 0.64 & _0.41_ & _0.45_ & _0.40_ \\ \hline Green vehicles & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \(0.0\pm 0.0\) & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) & \(0.0\pm 1.0\) \\  & & 0.77 & 0.64 & 0.55 & 0.60 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Notes: Effect size is considered to be: very high if \(|\delta|<0.147\) (bold font), high if \(0.147<|\delta|<0.33\) (bold italic font), medium if \(0.33<|\delta|<0.474\) (italic font), and low if \(|\delta|\geq 0.474\) (normal font).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Credit points achieved for Location and Transportation category of LEED-NCv4 projects: median \(\pm\) interquartile range (IQR, 25 th–75 th) and Cliff’s \(\delta\) effect size of differences between possible and achieved points in a credit. Figure 2: The boxplot results and [PERSON]’s \(\delta\) effect size between possible and achieved points in the Location and Transportation (LT) category. Effect size is considered to be: very high if \(|\delta|<0.147\) (bold font), high if \(0.147<|\delta|<0.33\) (bold italic font), medium if \(0.33<|\delta|<0.474\) (italic font), and low if \(|\delta|\geq 0.474\) (normal font).