See all forum discussions about NC-2009 SSc4.4
 Subscribe to new posts about NC-2009 SSc4.4 Post a new question aboutNC-2009 SSc4.4
See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-2009 SSc4.4»
FAQs about SSc4.4 :

How does one account for off-site parking. Should the LEED boundary encompass this parking? Or alternatively may the project pursue the "no new parking" option?

If a project does not provide parking onsite but provides a shuttle service to new parking offsite, is that considered “no new parking” since the new parking is not onsite?

Does rebuilding an existing parking area with fewer spaces mean “no new parking”?

If a non-residential project wants to use Option 4, which references the  ITE Parking Generation Study, where does one upload and submit required documentation? There is no Option 4 choice in the credit form.

How do you designate preferred parking if the parking facility is not under the owner's control?

How does one apply minimum zoning requirements to a project when it is part of a larger complex or campus?

Are there standards regarding how to document the spaces that will be dedicated as reserved?

How does a carpool/vanpool relate to a shared car service/company when it comes to the preferred parking requirements of this credit?

Should I consider motorbikes and parking spaces for them under this credit? What about fleet vehicles?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-2009 SSc4.4:Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity

no new parking

Default Avatar
Crina Bosch
Project Coordinator
Karpinski Engineering
LEEDuser Premium Member
0 thumbs up

My understanding of this credit's intent is to reduce the impact of automobiles for commuters. Our project, a commerical office building, has a parking garage off site for commuters, but is adding 6 parking spaces on the buildings lower floor for vehicles owned by the county. Does anyone have any experience or insight as to whether or not we can still use the "no new parking" option seeing as these spots are not for employee or visitor vehicles?

0
Post a reply

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Thu, 01/30/2014 - 22:17

Hi James, the intent of the credit is "to reduce pollution and land development impacts from automobile use". As such, it doesn't sound like you would be eligible for the points under "no new parking" (option 3). I suggest checking to see if your project is eligible under options 1 or 2.

Wed, 08/27/2014 - 17:20

I have a related question. My project is an addition to an existing building. It will add a few parking spaces for buses, not cars. Building users will access the parking structure in the existing building. Does this qualify for No New Parking?
Profile picture for user wweaver
William Weaver
LEED Fellow, WELL AP
JLL
LEEDuser Basic Member
125 thumbs up

Wed, 08/27/2014 - 17:55

Hi Sara, This is just my interpretation, but I would venture to say that your project would not be eligible for no new parking. The intent is to reduce pollution and land development impacts from automobile use. I would say that applies regardless of whether the automobile is a car or bus - either way, it has a negative land impact by increasing parking surface area, and increases the vehicular emissions on site.
Default Avatar
Erin Holdenried
Sustainability Architect
LEEDuser Basic Member
88 thumbs up

Wed, 08/27/2014 - 18:05

Sara - If you are only adding bus parking spaces, then you should qualify for the credit via "no new parking." This credit is for personal vehicle parking used for commuting. So, you can also exclude parking for fleet vehicles, etc.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.