My project is a city Transportation Center, on a triangular downtown infill site. It is bordered on one side by a METRO light rail station, on another by the city court and jail, and on the third by a city street (project construction extended into the street for the bus bays accessed from the Transportation Center). The city owns and operates all of these adjacent sites (METRO is an agency of the 3 cities who developed the rail). Because of our ownership we have no setbacks for the building, which is on the "property line" adjacent to the police sallyport (gated access to deliver people...

I have a project where the only exterior lights are within a courtyard that is surrounded by the building on all sides, 4 storys tall. Would the project still have to submit a photometric plan? Or would a lighting plan and building section be enough to show that there will be zero light trespass? SSc8 ...

We are trying to pursue this credit as a campus credit. However, 1 out of the 4 buildings we are certifying within the LEED Campus Boundary doesn't comply because it's 24hs, luminaires have a direct line of sight to the opening in the building envelope, and doesn't have automatic shading. Are we elegible to pursue this credit for the other 3 buildings via master site? Thanks SSc8 ...

Our Project has a LEED boundary that crosses a parking lot. This means that half of the parking lot is within the leed boundary and the other half is outside the leed boundary. In order to comply with SSc8, do we need to respect the light trespass for this part of the border crossing the parking lot. In a way that does not make a lot of sense because there are already lights on the parking lot outside the leed boundary. SSc8 ...

If I have parking lot lighting existing on a site that is near our project but outside the LEED boundary I assume that will not be required to be incldued in Light pollution calcs. If we decide to not have any building fixtures on the exterior is that okay. We think the existing lighting outside the boundary is sufficient for the area. Will this be okay and not conflict with LEED submission? SSc8 ...

Hi All, My project consists of a large parking lot where all interior parking spaces are located under solar canopies and perimeter parking spaces are uncovered. When calculating exterior LPD, there doesn't seem to be a category for Covered Parking in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Addenda i. There are pole fixtures located around the perimeter of the uncovered so these will be consided Uncovered Parking Areas and Drives. However, there are fixtures beneath the Solar Canopies (installed by the PV manufacturer) that illuminate the covered parking spots. How are these to be considered? They don't seem to fall...

We are working on the site illumination model to measure compliance with the light trespass requirements. We would like to know if trees or other outdoor mask need to be taken into consideration into the model? In fact, trees or mask can protect or avoid light trespass from outside. If yes, how they can be include into the model? Thanks a lot in advance for your recommandation. SSc8 ...

I tried to fiend a definition of "Shield envelope openings that have a direct line of sight to non-emergency luminaires". Does that mean that you should not be able to see the luminaire from outside when you look into the building (through openings) or does that mean that no direct light (as opposed to indirect light) should emit out of the building (through windows etc.). SSc8 ...

LEED interpretation 10236 (http://www.usgbc.org/leed-interpretations?keys=10236&=Search#) seems to indicate that the lighting boundary is a modification of the project boundary (e.g. 5' at parking lots or to centerline along public streets). It also says, "All instances in the credit language of "LEED project boundary" or "site boundary" shall be considered to refer to the "lighting boundary", for the purposes of this credit only." So, when the LEED credit says, for LZ3... "produce a maximum initial illuminance value no greater than 0.20 horizontal and vertical...

project is along an arterial road with lots of city lights. i see the leed interpretation #10114- which allows leed boundary to be extended outward to midline of street in this scenario. my question is, does leed allow this boundary extension to apply only to its inherent issue with light pollution credit? or do we have to apply this leed boundary to everything? If everything, it becomes a little bit ridiculous- because the "project hardscape" begins to include the pavement of the major thruway. SSc8 ...