I am working on a v3 NC project being built on a site with an abundance of native vegetation. As a result of the presence of all the vegetation we are trying to preserve, we have to move our staging area to a not-so-grassy spot away from the building on the other side of existing parking for an existing building on the site. This land is being disturbed for the sole purpose of this project but it is non-contiguous, and we don't satisfy (a) through (f) on the non-contiguos allowance. I want to make sure that it is not to be included in the LEED Boundary based on MPR 3. Any thoughts?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
October 15, 2010 - 11:07 pm
The MPRs are conflicting in this case. On the one hand they oblige you to include it (MPR 3.1), on the other hand they oblige you NOT to include it (also MPR 3.1 - not contiguous).I think the more conservative approach would be to include it, so I would proceed based on that, but it's definitely worth checking with your reviewer.