Hi we have a site whereby our LEED boundary includes two separately zoned areas and one is zoned for buildings with 30% open space required by local planners. The second space equivalent to the same area again (i.e half our site) has a requirement to achieve 95% in order to keep it open as a park.
We have to include the park within our boundary as our building has a carpark below it.
To go for 25% extra space on top of the 95% is just a bit too much to force onto the rest of the site.
Does anyone think we have a case to say that provied we go for extra 25% in the built area the parkland should be exempt from the calculation as it already meets the intent of the credit.
Hope I haven't confused you all too much
Susan Walter
HDRLEEDuser Expert
1299 thumbs up
July 11, 2011 - 3:45 pm
Are you building this park along with the carpark underneath or is it an existing condition? Would your project earn the credit, hypothetically, under the other options? Would you meet the 50% EP threshold combining both sites together? I think if you can look at your site more holistically you may be able to build your case for Option 1 with the reviewers. It is hard to understand based on the information you provided.
Devon Bertram
Sustainability ManagerYR&G
214 thumbs up
October 24, 2011 - 5:14 pm
Hi Julian, Any updates on your approach here? Although there is not an explicit approach for this situation, it seems best to evaluate each area separately and meet the credit requirements using the appropriate compliance path for each individual area.