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

Post a reply

Susan Walter

HDR

LEEDuser Expert

894 thumbs up

Mon, 07/11/2011 - 19:45

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 Manager

YR&G

LEEDuser Basic Member

151 thumbs up

Mon, 10/24/2011 - 21:14

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.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.

You are currently logged in under an enterprise account

FAQs about SSc5.2 :

zoning requirement split 30% and 95%

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

Add new comment