This question is somewhat related to Leah's question dated 1.23.2012, but a different circumstance. The vegetated area of the site is approximately 65,000 sf, comprised of 13k mixed, 22k warm season turf, and 30k 25+ year-old established trees. We are providing drip irrigation for the mixed vegetation, and sprinkler irrigation for the warm season turf. Since the existing trees are well established, there is no need for irrigation, and none has been provided.
For the design case, do we include the 30,000 sf of tree area that is not irrigated? If so, how do we properly demonstrate zero water consumption? Under 'Type,' I can select other and indicate 'None' and enter 0 for IE to in effect show zero irrigation. However, I do not believe this to be the correct way to do so. Please advise.
Susann Geithner
PrincipalEmerald Built Environments
1297 thumbs up
May 31, 2012 - 3:51 pm
For the existing trees you would include them in both design and baseline case just as you described. You may want to note under special circumstances that this is because these are existing trees.
Elizabeth Powers
PrincipalO'Brien360
45 thumbs up
October 16, 2013 - 3:33 pm
Its been a while since this issue was discussed but I'd like to clarify my understanding. It the case above, both the design and baseline cases would be identical? Or can you assume the "conventional practice" for the baseline. If they are equal, then that area has no effect on the credit so it is the same as leaving out areas left in a natural state - but we should still put them in calculation because they are "landscaped." Is that correct?