The owner has a land which is divided into 3 parts. One part (A) will consist of a buidling which the owner wants to certify, second part (B) will consist of a park.The problem is with the third part (C) where the owner won't build anytning at the moment but he might in the future, it's not sure yet. Can a LEED project boundry consist of a land that might be changed and where another building might be constructed in the future?
I also have to add that part B (the park) is not contiguous to part A (where the building will be constructed); it's situated next to part C where we don't know what's going to be in the future. So if it turns out that we have to exclude part C from LEED project boundary then can we still include part B?
I hope my description is not too confusing.
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Kimberly Frith
323 thumbs up
November 20, 2012 - 10:46 am
Is this three separate construction contracts? It might make sense to only include part A for your LEED project (if that includes all the land associated with/to be disturbed for developing that building). Then in the future you could have a second LEED project for your part C development. For clarity - you don't need to include parts B and C just because the Owner owns them, if they are not included in the scope of work for getting part A finished.
Adam Targowski
OwnerATsec
103 thumbs up
November 21, 2012 - 3:57 am
Part A and B should be under one construction contract. Part C will stay empty for now. We were thinking of including all the parts to have more possibilities of obtaining LEED points. Since part B will be a green area it can contribute to obtaining points under SS Cre5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2 and WE Cre1. So I would like to ask a question regarding two options:
1. Can we include all the parts even if part C might have a building in the future?
2. Can only part A and B be included even if they are not contiguous?
Kimberly Frith
323 thumbs up
November 21, 2012 - 2:20 pm
1. It is OK to include all the parts if part C might have a building in the future, but you will need to denote those areas of future development so that you aren't taking credit for the open space where a building will go in the future (all open space has to be maintained for the lifetime of your building project).
2. It should be a contiguous LEED boundary unless you meet the special conditions in the MPR supplemental guidance, page 25.
See the note in the MPR supplemental guidance regarding gerrymandering the boundary to comply with credits, and remember some site credits allow you to use designated off-site areas for compliance.
Adam Targowski
OwnerATsec
103 thumbs up
January 7, 2013 - 6:03 am
Kimberly, thank you for your previous answers. I would like to come back to our conversation and make sure of one thing: if there will be another building built in the future, on the site already assigned to a LEED project, can it also apply for LEED certification assuming it will be registered as a building without a site (that the LEED project boundary will consist only of a building footprint and won't use more site of the previous project)? Thank you in advance for clarification.
Kimberly Frith
323 thumbs up
January 8, 2013 - 8:04 am
Your future building should be able to apply for LEED certification if it meets all the MPRs and prerequisites, regardless of the site area associated with it. You just would not be able to claim the open space adjacent to it that you had already dedicated to your previous project. Take a look at the campus LEED boundary and individual LEED boundary scenarios in the new AGMBC, it explains different ways to divide up a multiple-building site. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2326