Option 2 Path 4 Heat island Effect nonroof

SS c1 is looking at the building, which your space is in. So when you fill out the PI Forms you are asked to provided information about the project site are, if included in the projects (so you are using it get credits). You will have to provided the total area there. You will also need a site plan to show the boundary of the site, which you will be using to show compliance with that credit. So the reviewer is right by saying you must use the LEED CI project boundary. But you have two different once. Your space boundary and your site boundary. What you should or should not include in the site boundary depend on ownership and actual use associated with your building.

SSc1 pertains to the building in which your project is located. However when you submit for review you will have to tell the reviewer in the PI Forms, what you consider as building site and therefore claim for the credit. You probably just submitted a floor plan highlighting the LEED project boundary. You will also need to submit a site plan highlighting the site boundary (under PIF), which you consider for your LEED project. That's like a second LEED boundary. You probably have enter 0 for building site in PI form. So that's why the reviewer says it's not in the LEED boundary. Also claimed anything under SSc1 does not require you to have done work as part of the project. Another issue I have come across is that you may have gotten a standard review comment, which just does not fit one to one to your project. If you still can figure out what's wrong, just email the reviewer through LEEDOnline and ask for clarification.

This issue still isn't entirely clear to me. Isn't the reviewer asking the team to establish and use the boundary for the base building, as this credit applies to the base building?

It's about the building not the space: The intent of SS c1 is to give points to projects, which located in sustainable buildings. So you can either locate in a LEED certified building or a building with sustainable features. In the second case you need to show that the building has those sustainable features. In Sue's case this is the heat island effect reduction for non-roof. Also these features could have been in place already, are to be installed parallel to the build-out. As long as they are there when the construction is finished, you can apply them to this credit. LEED CI project boundary not always equals LEED project: Now the LEED CI project boundary on the other side includes only the build-out area. the MPR guide states: "Generally, construction work or space that serves spaces other than the one certifying may be excluded from the LEED project boundary. " So the building exterior is not included in the LEED CI project boundary. So technically the reviewer is wrong if you stick to the exact wording. But as I noted above, if you do use the building site to document a credit than you have to enter the site area in the PI Form (even though it tells you only to included area, which are part of the project). Otherwise the reviewer notes correctly, that you have not used area included in your LEED project. What belongs to your building? You usually only define one boundary, the LEED project boundary. For SS C1 you also have to define, what you consider your building and your building's site. These are documents, which you do not necessary have to submit for the LEED CI project, but here you do. I hope this clears things up.

Not really clear and I think it's still not quiet adopted to LEED CI. Anyway. It's on PIF2, first page, site characteristics "Total site area within the LEED project boundary, including project footprint Note: If project does not include site work, enter "0"." Enter it there even though it asks you not to. If you like, clarify that with a short sentence under "Additional Details". I haven't had this particular issue yet, but very similar issues with other credits. PIF is asking for gross area and then this shows up in the credit forms as actually a net area. In regards to the review comment, see my comment above. If you still have time, send the reviewer a request for clarification and ask, if that's what you should do. I don't know your project and haven't seen your entire review comment. So I might misinterpreted the issue. Good Luck