The credit requirements excuse "previously developed" sites for 1) the 100-year floodplain and 2) within 50' of a water body. This is not specifically mentioned 3) within 100' of wetlands. Does anyone know? I have a project that is within 100' of a wetland, but the area on which we will be building/paving was entirely previously developed long ago. For that matter, we are likely digging up some of the paving and restoring it to natural habitat/wetland. Anyway, would appreciate any opinions on whether or not we can earn the point building within 100' of a wetland on land that was entirely previously developed?
Thank you - Kris
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
February 26, 2013 - 9:10 am
Kris, I think the credit language is intentional on this point—and you wouldn't be able to earn the credit. As a consolation, your work should help with SSc5, SSc6, and SSc7.
Kris Phillips
Arcadis10 thumbs up
February 26, 2013 - 1:31 pm
Thanks Tristan. I think I agree with you, but it seems counterintuitive to LEED's push to develop on previously developed land because we could theoretically get this point by developing on a greenfield instead of on land that was developed decades ago when preserving wetlands was not on many people's radar. Since this project is likely going to the effort of restoring wetland that was previously developed, I may still attempt this credit under a "special circumstance" or "alternative compliance path." Can't hurt to try anyway, I suppose. Thanks again.
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
February 26, 2013 - 1:51 pm
I see your point, but a counterargument would be that we should generally pull back from wetlands rather than maintaining development that encroaches on them. And this is a credit, not a prereq—and your restoration work will be recognized under the credits I mentioned.It's a complex issue and tough to make a single rule that makes sense in all cases. I like where LEED v4 is going with this, with a site assessment credit, where you get credit just for doing an integrated analysis of siting and other issues.You might need a CIR or LEED Interpretation to get an exception to such a black-and-white credit requirement.
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
March 8, 2013 - 2:08 pm
Kris, I'd like to amend my earlier advice and recommend contacing GBCI through their website to seek advice on whether you can proceed with documenting the credit in this way, or if you'd need an official ruling in the form of a CIR or LEED Interpretation to continue. GBCI is now encouraging this kind of direct communication.
Kris Phillips
Arcadis10 thumbs up
March 19, 2013 - 11:10 am
Tristan,
Thanks for the follow up. In the interim, I also discovered that this particular "wetland" was a human creation and not one that was there naturally on the site prior to the development. This adds yet another level of complication to the documentation of SSc1 for this specific site. I will try to contact GBCI directly and see how they respond. I will provide an update in here if/when they do.
Kris Phillips
Arcadis10 thumbs up
April 1, 2013 - 9:27 am
Tristan,
Update: I sent an email directly to GBCI, but have not yet heard back. When the time comes, I intend to submit the credit with an explanation of our "special circumstance" and see what happens. Personally, I feel that we are meeting the intent and requirements within reason as well as going to the extra measure of restoring and building wetlands. But, I realize my opinion isn't what counts.
Thanks,
Kris
Elizabeth Thompson
Green Building SpecialistUSGBC/ GBCI
78 thumbs up
April 10, 2013 - 4:50 pm
Thank you for your question, asking whether keeping an existing road that is approximately 80' from the a constructed/developed wetland on a previously developed site will prevent the project from achieving SSc1.
As long as there is no grading, utility installation, or other alteration of the existing road, the location of the existing road should not affect the ability of the project to earn SSc1. The scope of this credit addresses new development or alterations, rather than existing work, per the guidance on page 17 of the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction, 2009 Edition (Updated June 2010): "Do not DEVELOP buildings, hardscape, roads or parking areas on portions of sites that meet any of the following criteria..." An existing road, if not altered in any way, is not considered new development, and thus, would not be included in the scope of this credit.
You also asked how a constructed wetland would be viewed by the reviewer. For LEED- BD+C 2009 projects, constructed wetlands are included in the scope of a wetland. Please see the reference standards for this credit (the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR, Parts 230-233 and Part 22, or a local equivalent definition outside the U.S., and isolated wetlands or areas of special concern identified by state or local rule, etc.) for more information.
Also, it was pointed out that the exception provided for previously developed flood plains and proximity to water bodies isn't provided for wetlands. This is correct. These exceptions allow NEW development in those areas if they were previously developed. This exception is not extended to wetland areas.
We hope that this helps, but please let us know if you have additional questions and we will be glad to help.