You may need to seek clarification from GBCI.
I reviewed the LEED MPR supplemental guidance, as I would recommend you do, and it specifies that a building must be permanent. Most of the language around this seems to focus on mobile buildings, but there is a also a statement that a temporary building, even one that's intended to stand for 25 years, could not be certified.
How do you or others read this?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
John Klein
Sr. ArchitectHDR Engineering
33 thumbs up
August 31, 2010 - 5:10 pm
Tristan
I agree that the MPR supplement (thanks for the lead by the way) is clear that the building must be "permanent". I read permanent as implying fixed or non-mobile rather than an inferred or planned duration for the entire facility to exist. In the end, it would come down to an invidvidual case analysis a and consult by USGBC. I think you could design a "semi-permanent" structure that meets the LEED criteria. I don't see the life cycle issue as having a prohibitive impact necessarily. There is a brief statement at the end that I think puts some clarity to the issue:
Certifying temporary buildings:
The amount of time that a building or space is intended to remain standing does not affect ompliance with this MPR. (p 11).
I guess the answer is "it depends."
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
September 1, 2010 - 11:50 am
Michelle, Cara Mae's response below clears things up.I think it would be cool to see a project like this pursue an IDc1 credit for design for deconstruction, reuse, and/or adaptation. I imagine it has been done before.