We are working in project within a universitary campus. The particular site has been a deposit of soil from other building construccion, is surronded by road access and is used as a informal paking lot. Although nothing was ever built in this site, i understand that i can consider this site as previously developed, since the human intervencion has already damaged the natural caracteristics of the original site. Do you consider my considerations correct?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Albert Sagrera
ArchitectSocietat Organica
13 thumbs up
May 15, 2012 - 6:49 am
The definition says that "land use that would typically have required regulatory permitting to have been initiated" this would be the case of a parquing lot, at least here in Spain. There is a real damage related to the parking like, for example, the lost of engine oil in the soil... Would LEED consider this correct reasoning?
Susann Geithner
PrincipalEmerald Built Environments
1297 thumbs up
May 31, 2012 - 4:07 pm
I would agree with you. Your site is consider previously developed, if a parking lot was located on it before. But be careful with the new definition per addendum 11/1/2011 "altered landscapes resulting from current or historical clearing or filling .. are considered undeveloped land."
Albert Sagrera
ArchitectSocietat Organica
13 thumbs up
June 11, 2012 - 10:47 am
Thanks Susann! We've recently discovered that previously there was an archery field instaled on the site, also that there is an underground electric line instaled. Would these activities/instalations also count to justify "non previously developed"?
Susann Geithner
PrincipalEmerald Built Environments
1297 thumbs up
June 11, 2012 - 5:11 pm
The utility line (electric line) makes it previously developed. So you are good.
Studio 804
Studio 804October 2, 2012 - 8:58 pm
Hi Sussan, I have a similar situation to the one above. We are working on a project with a site at the edge of a university campus. There is a parking lot and we are just on the other side of it. Our site seems to have been a dumping ground for fill dirt over the years, which I know does not allow us to call it previously developed, and there was never a building located there. But there is a 5'x5' storm drain located approx. 50' into our site with a buried 36" concrete pipe running from it. From what I can tell, our site should be considered previously developed because of this. Is this correct?
Susann Geithner
PrincipalEmerald Built Environments
1297 thumbs up
October 5, 2012 - 3:48 pm
If the storm drain was a permitted alteration, so it's in the cities maps and drawings, for sure I would consider it previously developed. Just be careful to not stretch it to far. if the pipe is only going through a small part of a large site, than I would consider it a stretch and the reviewer may see it the same way.
I hope that helps.