I am working with the latest version of PI Form 2 on a project and it includes several new lines to complete. One that we are struggling with ask for the "square footage of all parking areas." Does anyone know what is included in the calculation for "all parking areas"? Does it include just parking spaces, driveways, or all paved areas?

Hello,

The project that I'm working on is going to involve construction of additional rights of way in the form of a collector street/woonerf running through the project and connecting to existing streets at both ends. In determining the project boundary for LEED ND, my understanding is that the boundary must be drawn along property lines or public-access rights of way.

My question is: Can we use the boundary of our to-be-constructed right of way as the project boundary when applying for Stage 3 certification?

Thanks

Hi.
I'm LEED AP but don't have experience for LEED certifications. This is my first time.
I'm working on LEED certification for US army project.
For example, project consists of 4 buildings : two offices bldg & two storage.

I wonder this project can certify a group of new buildings as a package and be rated as a package and only one rating received.

Accroding to LEED NC Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On Campus Building Projects(AGMBC, 2005), EQ credit require every building must meet credit requirement independently.

Storages are considered FTE is less than 1, so I think they are needed to earn EQ credit. But I think the other credit categories(EA, MR..etc.) can be applied to them.

Is it possible to register project grouping all buildings above? or group only two office building?

This project is applied LEED ver 2.2, not ver.3. US army want LEED ver 2.2, because US army evaluate this with ver 2.2.

I heard about there is no MPR(Minimum Program Requirement) in ver2.2. So I don't know how to grouped these buildings.

Any comments would be appriciated.

We are working on a resort project with multiple small buildings each with 2~3 stories. The main building house hotel public and function areas including ballroom, restaurants, ect. Other buildings are all guest rooms. All these buildings are stand-alone except that they are connected by open corridors from the 2nd floor and above. These buildings are served by a central energy plant located in the main building. Our questions are: 1. Should these buildings be considered as individual buildings (as they are only connected by open corridors)? If so, we will use the approach of LEED for multiple buildings.
2. LEED for multiple buildings Part 2 says the buildings or spaces that comprise the group should have space types that are substantially similar. In this case, can we include the main building together with the other guest room buildings in one group certification.

Thanks!

http://www.masterspec.com/users/specifying_leed_requirements.php

ARCOM offers some sort of checklist or template where you can select the credits you are attempting and it will give you a chart of which spec sections should include specific LEED language (going for approach B here). Is there any type of tool offered through leeduser that does the same thing?

I have a PDF and have also used the Harvard Green Building Initiative as a guide reference before, but wondered about this excel chart or spreadsheet. See link: http://green.harvard.edu/sites/all/themes/green-ofs/theresource/new-cons...

Any insight would be appreciated!

Thanks

How does one define under which rating system the master site should be registered?

We have a 220.000 m2 built area Master Site. At this moment, two office buildings in the site will be LEED-CS certified. Total built area of the office buildings is 30.000 m2. Rest of the Master Site consists of residential space. We have defined the Master Site to be a CS registration as well because we want to do the precertification application for the Master Site as well.

Or is there some other rule to follow?

Our LEED Core & Shell project is a retail building that will have multiple tenants, but it is a speculative project (as we indicate at the top of the second page of PI Form 3). By definition, we don't have any tenants committed at this point. The problem is that PIf4 is asking for the following:

"Upload L-6. Provide the legally binding document (lease, sales agreement, tenant construction requirements, etc.) associated with the project, signed by both the developer and the tenant, explicitly stating the performance requirements for the tenant work."

We are depending on the ability to use the lease language to ensure that the tenants comply with our standards, but we may not have signed leases for the entire building by the time we are ready to submit for certification. I would think that by checking the "The project building is speculative" box in PIf3, we would not be expected to have tenants right away and, therefore, would not be expected to have signed leases. Does anyone have any experience with this? Would it be acceptable to upload the standard lease for the building along with a statement that the LEED criteria are not negotiable?

I think my main issue with this announcement is the lack of consistency in the way that USGBC/GBCI is making these decisions and announcements.

Addenda are only applicable to projects registered after the addenda date. This makes sense as then projects know what to expect! However, occasionally decisions like this are (poorly) disseminated which means that a project which was previously guaranteed something, now can no longer expect it. Making retroactive decisions in this way is what leaves a bad taste in our clients mouths regarding LEED.

I can understand the need to make this change going forward, but if it was stated that they would get this, why would you take it away mid-stream? This is not fair, and over-all hurts the impression our clients have of USGBC, GBCI, LEED, and our company. We try not to apologize on behalf of LEED or throw LEED under the bus, but these decisions make it difficult!

Also, we have long been making our own nice framed certificates for our 2009 projects that we give our clients in lieu of purchasing the expensive plaques.

Below is an excerpt from a communication I recently received:

" We are seeing a trend towards multiple submittals and appeals from GBCI since the adoption of version 2009. In particular, their comments for EAp2 and EAc1 have risen significantly".

As a project administrator, I have noticed that it seems that there is a real communication gap between engineers and reviewers. Wondering if anyone else out there has noticed this? And now with appeal costs increasing (for some credits) it would be a great if there was a solution to this. Any similar experiences or advice, out there?

We are using the campus approach for a mixed used development. None of the prerequisites will be applied under the master site. However, in the project registration for the master site, one is not able to uncheck the prerequisite credits. How does this work? Are we still supposed to fill out the forms for these prerequisites?