Hi,
I'm working on a new construction mixed use development which contains both Residential buildings and Office buildings.
Only the Office buildings are being certified - LEED BD&C Core and Shell.
The Offices are being built adjacent to and over, an existing library building, which is owned by the local authority.
The development is also adjacent to a small park (owned by the council).
Both the Library and park are included in the project works. The library will be refurbished and extended and the park will be upgraded.
I intend excluding the apartment buildings from the project red line boundary as these are not being certified and may be constructed in a separate phase.
However, I feel the park should be included due to the significant upgrades.
The Library floor area is relatively small (2%) when compared to the new build office and I think I could exclude this.
Firstly - is it acceptable to include the existing park which is being upgraded? (even if it is not owned by the developer)
Can the red line change from floor to floor? The office building eventually bridges across over the roof of the library - so the red line for that floor will be different to the ground floor (if the library was excluded for example)
Can you please advise,
Thanks
PJ
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
January 31, 2020 - 11:42 am
PJ, a LEED project boundary can operate in three dimensions, so it is possible to exclude floors of a building, for example, or to include a building the projects over another building without having to include the lower building (or vice versa, for that matter).
In your specific case, however, I'm not sure I agree with your approach. Extending a LEED boundary to include park area is typically beneficial in terms of supporting credit achievement. Doing that while excluding a building that is also in the project scope may be perceived as "gerrymandering," i.e. drawing lines that are arbitrary in terms of scope and are unfairly biased toward credit achievement.
Since the library is in project scope, why not include it? Since you mention that it is small, perhaps it will not be that hard to include and won't hurt you on credit achievement.
I'm not saying you have to, as I think the situation has some judgement calls involved, and again, you are able to draw the line in three dimensions.
Deborah Lucking
Director of SustainabilityFentress Architects
LEEDuser Expert
245 thumbs up
February 3, 2020 - 10:19 am
Agree with Tristan that the LEED boundary can be 3-dimensional. Just be sure that the boundary configuration aligns with your MEP and metering systems.
As for the park, I don't see how you can include that in your project - it has a different owner, thus your client and contractor have no control over it's design and construction.
Do consider discussing this with the good folks at GBCI - they have been very helpful advising on projects that are not yet registered for certification.
Good luck!