My project is a new residential tower (with an underground parking garage), which will be constructed on an existing parking lot that serves an adjacent residential tower. Because the adjacent residential tower will lose their parking lot, my project will be constructing a new parking lot (along with new green space) in the area between the two buildings. I am unsure if the new parking lot should be included in my LEED site boundary, seeing as it does not serve our building residents or support our building operations. However, the new green space will be accessible to residents of both buildings and I feel that it therefore should be included in our LEED site boundary. Any advice on drawing the site boundary would be appreciated!
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
David Posada
Integrated Design & LEED SpecialistSERA Architects
LEEDuser Expert
1980 thumbs up
November 20, 2012 - 3:53 pm
Good question!
When you read the MPR Supplemental Guidance v2 for MPR 3, item #1 says the LEED boundary should "include all land that was or will be disturbed for the purpose of undertaking the LEED project."
That suggests you'd include the new parking lot in your boundary, and include that area for the stormwater management, open space, and heat island credits. If your underground garage serves the your tower, you could write a narrative that explains how the parking spaces in the new surface lot aren't included in your parking counts for SSc4 since they serve the other building.
Now, MPR 3 item #2 says you LEED boundary should not include land owned by another party, "unless that land is associated with and supports the normal building operations" for your LEED building. If the existing adjacent tower is owned by a different party, you would then include the green space since it serves your building, but exclude the surface parking lot since it's owned by someone else. If there's separate ownership and you exclude the surface parking lot, you'll want that scope of work under a different contract, and you'll need to track those materials and costs separately from your LEED project.
If the same party owns both towers, that suggests including the new surface lot. You'll probably want to contact GBCI customer service for technical assistance on this question to get an official response since it's, well, an MPR, and might have contract or scope implications.
Iris Amdur
PrincipalGreenShape LLC
50 thumbs up
November 29, 2012 - 3:58 pm
Thank you for your help! The adjacent tower and property is owned by a different party. I talked to the owner of my project, and to clarify, it appears that the green space is only intended for use by the adjacent tower's residents. Therefore, it may be best for us to only include our tower, since both the parking lot and green space are being constructed as a requirement of the purchase agreement of our site from the adjacent tower's owners. I will clarify this with GBCI customer service!
Iris Amdur
PrincipalGreenShape LLC
50 thumbs up
December 12, 2012 - 4:05 pm
I did inquire with GBCI, and just as an FYI, this is their response: "It is noted on page 23 of the Supplemental Guidance to the Minimum Program Requirements, rev 2, Sep 2011 that all land disturbed for the project must be included in the LPB. So, while the parking provided for the adjacent residential tower should not be included in your parking calculations, the materials used and site conditions of that area need to be included. LEED Interpretation ID# 10227, dated 10/1/2012, reinforces this point."