I have a project where a patch of forestry has been removed for a new university building. There is still the rest of the forest around the building that is outside of the LEED project boundary which was established from the "limit of work" boundary on the site plan. Since falls under the Option 1 for greenfield, should identify only the undisturbed site areas within the LEED project boundary or can identify the those beyond the boundary? I ask because after making the credit-specific site plan with all associated disturbance limits, there are some greenfield spots left undisturbed within the LEED project boundary, and in one case the disturbance limit for the building perimeter breaches the LEED project boundary? Will that be a problem for obtaining this credit?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Summer Minchew
Managing PartnerEcoimpact Consulting
LEEDuser Expert
170 thumbs up
August 28, 2017 - 9:30 am
LI 1972 might apply here "Project teams are allowed to define the "LEED project site" boundary themselves. As such, it is acceptable to exclude areas of the site from the "LEED project site" boundary. Teams are encouraged to establish a reasonable and logical site boundary for LEED purposes. The project scope of work and the site area affected by the construction generally suffice to inform this definition. Once defined, the site boundary must be used consistently throughout all credits. Generally speaking, when different site boundaries are under consideration, it is advisable to analyze the impact on all affected credits to determine which site boundary definition is most beneficial. Given that no work is being done on the area of the site in question here, it seems logical that it could be excluded from the LEED project site boundary." If the limit of disturbance crosses the LPB but you are still meeting the credit requirements you should show that on the site plan.