Our project has limited turf areas that will require irrigation. We have a small irrigation system supplied by a rainwater cistern sized to provide required volume per LEED requirements. However, under drought conditions, the owner would like to be able to add potable water to the cistern if necessary. I have recommended a hose bibb intake for such conditions as LEED does not consider a hose bibb part of a permanent system. However, the owner has asked if we could instead install an emergency valve to connect to potable water supply to fill the cistern only under drought conditions. My gut is to stick with the hose bibb. Thoughts?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Susann Geithner
PrincipalEmerald Built Environments
1297 thumbs up
July 22, 2011 - 4:02 pm
The footnote for option 2 gives you the possibility to by pass the additional requirements. So if you are reducing the potable water by 100% compared to midsummer baseline case and your total water consumption by 50% than you earned this credit. So as long as your rainwater cistern is large enough and you have enough rainwater to meet the 100% reduction per baseline, you should be fine. I think your will be able to have the backup connection for long droughts to your regular system. But I would check the CIRs to be sure.
Thought judging from the intent of the credit it makes more sense to allow the use of your irrigation system, which is probably better than a hose and wastes less water.
Jenny Heim
office for local architectureNovember 1, 2012 - 1:32 pm
Lauren, I've had a similar question come up on a project. Which route did you end up taking and how did it turn out?