Dear All, if a Project consists of many small courtyyards and shade for those courtyyards is provided by the building structure itsself, Can this in any way be used to contribute to the fulfillment of the credit?
Thank you very much for your advice!
Kind regards, Carmen
Summer Minchew
Managing PartnerEcoimpact Consulting
LEEDuser Expert
138 thumbs up
April 19, 2017 - 4:12 pm
Is the shade provided by an architectural shading device or structure? If yes, that would fall under Nonroof strategies.
Carmen Mielecke
CEOLCEE Life Cycle Engineering Experts
4 thumbs up
May 10, 2017 - 12:08 pm
Hallo Summer, thanks for your answer. There won´t be any roof to provide shade (I mean no extra structure), the shade is provided by the walls of the building. As the courtyyard are very small, there will hardly be sunlight in summer. I wonder if this can be considered to contribute to fulfil the requirement of the credit. What do you think?
Carmen Mielecke
CEOLCEE Life Cycle Engineering Experts
4 thumbs up
May 12, 2017 - 10:00 am
Hallo Summer, thanks for your answer. There won´t be any roof to provide shade (I mean no extra structure), the shade is provided by the walls of the building. As the courtyyard are very small, there will hardly be sunlight in summer. I wonder if this can be considered to contribute to fulfil the requirement of the credit. What do you think?
Summer Minchew
Managing PartnerEcoimpact Consulting
LEEDuser Expert
138 thumbs up
May 18, 2017 - 11:04 am
Carmen: My sense is that you will not likely be allowed to consider the shade provided by the building itself. Consider the site/roof in plan view, assume direct sunlight overhead.
Carmen Mielecke
CEOLCEE Life Cycle Engineering Experts
4 thumbs up
May 23, 2017 - 5:37 am
Hallo Summer,
thanks for your answer. As the plot is far away from the equator, there will never be direct sunlight overhead. The ground will around the year always be shaded by the walls of the Building. Extra structures will not provide more shade, than there already is, they only would cost extra money...
Summer Minchew
Managing PartnerEcoimpact Consulting
LEEDuser Expert
138 thumbs up
May 23, 2017 - 7:09 am
Carmen: You could submit this strategy under alternative compliance path during credit review or you could submit this strategy for a formal LEED Interpretation Inquiry. If you do please follow up and let us know how it goes.
Florian Schmidtchen
EGS-plan International GmbH95 thumbs up
January 18, 2021 - 11:47 am
Dear Carmen Mielecke, How did it end with you? We have a similar situation in our project and I am also of the opinion that an integral building design that creates self-shading for large parts of the courtyard must be rewarded here. Question to everyone: If hardscapes never get direct sunlight, the influence of SR is certainly marginal, right?
Lyle Axelarris
Engineer, Building Enclosure Specialist, LEED AP BD+C, O+MDesign Alaska Inc.
47 thumbs up
July 20, 2021 - 4:32 pm
Carmen, I am 100% with you on this. It is extremely frustrating to me to think that LEED may ignore the most fundamental principle in sustainable design - design for your climate/site conditions.
They also seem to have forgotten how the sun works. "At noon" does not mean "directly overhead." In my location (Fairbanks Alaska), the solar angle at noon varies from ~3 degrees to ~47 degrees from the horizon. It will never be anywhere close to 90 degrees from the horizon. The sun will never be directly overhead for every location on Earth outside of the Tropics.
We rightfully take climate and location considerations into account for energy modeling, daylight modeling, regional prioritization, local materials, and bike network/public transit access. Each and every one of those things is far less certain and far less permanent than the angle of the sun. Can someone from USGBC please explain why fundamental science is being ignored in this credit? Frankly, it is embarrassing.