Hi,
Our project have a 100% parking space under cover which means we are okay with option 2. Do we need to comply with SRI value on the roof deck?
Thank you in advance.
Forum discussion
NC-v4 SSc5: Heat island reduction
Hi,
Our project have a 100% parking space under cover which means we are okay with option 2. Do we need to comply with SRI value on the roof deck?
Thank you in advance.
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium forTo post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.
emily reese moody
Sustainability Director, Certifications & ComplianceJacobs
LEEDuser Expert
476 thumbs up
October 9, 2019 - 6:40 pm
Hi Summer,
You are not required to have any certain SRI for your roof if you're not pursuing Opt 1 of this credit.
Summer
2 thumbs up
October 9, 2019 - 9:23 pm
Hi Emily,
Thanks a lot for your prompt response. Now it's more clearer in my understanding.
Eric Anderson
26 thumbs up
November 27, 2019 - 10:06 am
Hello Summer and Emily, It is probably worth clarifying that according to the NCv4 requirements for this credit, in order for the parking spaces on the top level of a parking deck (or at grade parking) to contribute towards the 75% threshold of Option 2, a roof immediately over such spaces actually would have to comply with a minimum 3-yr aged SRI of 32 (or, if three-year aged value information is not available, an initial SRI of at least 39), or be a vegetated roof, or be covered by energy generation systems. However, if you are referring to parking that is located under a building (more specifically, under enclosed gross floor area), even the top level of such a parking structure would contribute towards the 75% threshold regardless of the SRI of the roof above the building itself. An SRI requirement does not exist for parking placed underground, under deck, or under a building. Parking located directly below other parking levels would all be considered 'under deck'.
Rodolfo Loro, Jr.
Sustainability CoordinatorecoSolutions
3 thumbs up
March 9, 2020 - 10:20 pm
We have a few outdoor parking slots that cannot be fully covered. 1.6m out of a 5m length of parking space is left uncovered. Our other parking slots are located under the building. Can we still vy for the option of 100% parking under cover? Thanks
Eric Anderson
26 thumbs up
March 10, 2020 - 11:10 am
Hi Hannah, It's wonderful that you are making such an effort to reach the exemplary performance threshold for this credit! That said, the default assumption should be that a parking space that is not fully covered by qualifying roof/deck/cover cannot contribute towards meeting the requirements. However, of course, you can attempt any level of achievement for any credit and reviewers will consider special circumstances on a case-by-case basis. Any pertinent mitigating factors should be detailed for the consideration of the reviewers.
RDK E&S
Energy Engineer / Sustainability SpecialistNV5
15 thumbs up
March 18, 2020 - 3:20 pm
To confirm, if 100% of a project's parking scope was "underdeck", or placed under a building, would a project automatically qualify for Option 2 as there is no roof specifically for parking (and have no SRI or vegetated roof/Renewable energy requirements)?
Eric Anderson
26 thumbs up
March 23, 2020 - 1:22 pm
Yes. (However, it should be noted that unless the entire parking garage area in such a scenario also happens to be located under the footprint of the building's gross floor area, it's not likely that 100% of the parking would be compliant as some of it would likely be located, exposed, on the top deck of said parking garage.)