The V4 BD+C reference guide notes "When additional properties owned by the same entity responsible for the LEED project are contiguous to the
project site and have the same or a higher lighting zone as the project, the lighting boundary may be expanded to include those properties. In these cases, it is best if a lighting master plan is developed."
If the LEED project boundary is a smaller area that occurs within the interior of a larger primarily developed campus property, is is sufficient to demonstrate there is no potential for property boundary trespass from the LEED site as used to suffice in v2/v3 projects?
Or does this mean photometrics must be conducted including existing (potentially unidentifiable) light fixtures outside of the LEED project boundary that are more adjacent to the property line to demonstrate there is no trespass at the actual property line for the overall campus lighting?
emily reese moody
Sustainability Director, Certifications & ComplianceJacobs
LEEDuser Expert
452 thumbs up
February 7, 2018 - 7:31 pm
Anyone have any insight on this? We have a similar scenario coming up and are trying to prepare for discussion.
*edited to add*
This is the LI we were hoping to employ, but it looks like they don't consider it applicable to v4...thoughts?
https://www.usgbc.org/content/li-10236
Bill Swanson
Sr. Electrical EngineerIntegrated Design Solutions
LEEDuser Expert
731 thumbs up
February 8, 2018 - 9:02 am
There still might be some Reviewers that confuse the terms "project boundary" and "lighting boundary". I'm hoping it has been cleared up.
All lights within the project boundary must be included when showing compliance, either via BUG rating or photometric calculation.
On a campus type project you can extend the lighting boundary (only used for trespass calculations) to the campus boundary. Have two site plans.
1. Show a map of the campus with both the lighting boundary identified and the project boundary identified.
2. Show your normal site plan with the project boundary identified and any portion of the lighting boundary that may be visible. If you are doing photometrics, please add another decimal space. (Show 0.00 and not 0.0) And have the grid cover the whole drawing. Even if the lighting boundary is a mile away I have had review comments wanting to see where the 0.01 fc level is.
3. They may also ask for a vertical grid at the lighting boundary that is considered the brightest side.
The BUG compliance path is much easier than photometrics for documentation. On the 2nd site plan I just draw circles around the lights to show 0.5 times mounting height, 1.0 times mounting height, and 2.0 times mounting height. On a campus project it's easy to show how far away these lights are from the lighting boundary. And no need for a vertical grid with the BUG option.