No Permanent Irrigation System

Kevin, the credit is about reducing potable water use, so manual irrigation is not a way to earn the credit. In fact, manual irrigation can be less efficient than some permanent systems.The artificial turf won't help you earn the credit, because LEED does not want to incentivize reducing landscaped area as a way to earn the credit. The baseline and actual case here use the same landscaped area.

I agree with Tristan on everything above, although I do pause at the artificial turf issue. Certainly LEED would not want to provide an incentive for replacing landscaped area with say, a concrete patio or parking (thereby reducing irrigated area). But the use of artificial turf is effectively a zero-water method of providing nearly the exact same functionality. Here in Northern California artificial turf fields are becoming more and more common and the water savings are substantial. I'm not entirely convinced that LEED shouldn't support the switch from grass to artificial turf in WEc3. I suspect Tristan is right as to how a reviewer will respond, but its an interesting one for debate. Dan

Hi Tristan and Dan, how are you? Your knowledge from Leeduser always is very useful in my projects. What if I have the following situation: The lanscape area of an office building is irrigated manually only with reuse water (no potable). It's not economic feasible apply an irrigation system. Can this credit WEc3 be atempted? Thanks!

Hi Pedro We plan to use rain water for irrigating landscaped area manually too. We would like to know what did you do when you were in the similar situation? Thanks!