greenfield or previously developed land?

Hi Yasir, There is actually some ambiguity in this definition. Here is what I received from the USGBC when I brought it to their attention. "It appears that there is a discrepancy between the latest definition of previously developed site in the Glossary of the Reference Guide Addenda (see page 53 of this document: https://new.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/DocumentAddendaRG%20BD+C%2010.01.2012%20first%20ed.pdf) and the definition in the footnote to SSc5.1 of the LEED-NC v2009 Rating System, even in the latest version of the Rating System document (https://new.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/LEED%202009%20Rating_NC-GLOBAL_07-2012_8c.pdf). You are free to utilize either definition, as they are both published as applicable. Please note that we recommend using the revised definition from the Reference Guide Addenda below: "those altered by paving, construction, and/or land use that would typically have required regulatory permitting to have been initiated (alterations may exist now or in the past). Previously developed land includes a platted lot on which a building was constructed if the lot is no more than 1 acre; previous development on lots larger than 1 acre is defined as the development footprint and land alterations associated with the footprint. Land that is not previously developed and altered landscapes resulting from current or historical clearing or filling, agricultural or forestry use, or preserved natural area use are considered undeveloped land. The date of previous development permit issuance constitutes the date of previous development, but permit issuance in itself does not constitute previous development." I would consider it previously developed by virtue of the grading.