Preferred Parking Requirements

Interesting question. I would assume you could have a single sign that reserves spaces for both as long as you have enough of them for 5% of LEFEVs and 5% of carpooling vehicles. So 10% of total spaces....no double dipping.

Dan- We had the same thought on a LEED for NC project. Our review team did not accept that approach, citing LEED Interpretation #2292. The interesting technicality is that the interpretation states clearly that it applies to LEED C&S projects. Our project is registered under NC, but it would seem that our review team thinks it still applies.

Eric and Dan - The requirements for SSc4.3 and SSc4.4 for LEED CS projects are the same for NC projects; therefore, LEED Interpretation #2292 would be applicable. Ellen is correct, though. You could designate the spaces for both LE/FE and car/van pool vehicles if you designated 10% of the preferred parking spaces.

We have unsuccessfully used this approach. Here is our review comment: The LEED Submittal Template has been provided stating that 25 preferred parking spaces have been designated for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles. Site plans and details have also been provided. However, Overall Site Sheet A011 indicates a total of 50 parking spaces designated for either low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles or High Occupancy Vehicles. Combining the designated spaces for both low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles with High Occupancy Vehicles without ensuring that the minimum required spaces will be reserved for low-emitting and fuel efficient vehicles does not meet the credit requirements. We received the same comment for SSc4.4 and had to separate the signs.

HI Laura - the way that I'm reading your review comment makes me think that the reviewers don't have a problem with you combining the LEFEV spaces with the carpool spaces, but that they don't think you have the minimum number of spaces to meet the requirement. Were you able to get the credit(s) approved just by separating them and not adding any more spaces?

Sorry. Should have provided the entire comment. We needed 25 FEV/LEV spaces and 25 carpool spaces based on our total parking. We provided 50 signs that said parking for FEV/LEV or Carpool and they responded to both SSc4.2 and SSc4.4 that we needed separate signs to guarantee that the minimum required spaces would be reserved for each use (or permits which wouldn't work). Design Application The LEED Submittal Template has been provided stating that 25 preferred parking spaces have been designated for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles. Site plans and details have also been provided. However, Overall Site Sheet A011 indicates a total of 50 parking spaces designated for either low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles or High Occupancy Vehicles. Combining the designated spaces for both low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles with High Occupancy Vehicles without ensuring that the minimum required spaces will be reserved for low-emitting and fuel efficient vehicles does not meet the credit requirements. TECHNICAL ADVICE: Please provide a revised parking plan highlighting the spaces exclusively designated for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles or provide clarification as to how permits for both low emitting/fuel efficient vehicles and High Occupancy Vehicles will be issued.

Wow, well then I stand corrected. It surprises me that this approach was rejected - their technical advice seems to ask for information on enforcement, which isn't required in any other scenario. I suppose this is to ensure that all the spaces are not taken up by carpooling vehicles, leaving no room for LEFEVs (or vice versa). Has anyone else had experience with this approach? Did you get the same comment?

This portion of the comment seems unecessary and confusing "[...]without ensuring that the minimum required spaces will be reserved for low-emitting and fuel efficient vehicles " If you don't separate them you can't ensure that the spaces will be open for the right number of carpool/LEVs unless you have some parking attendant counting the number of cars and ensuring that not more than 50% of the spaces are taken up by Low Emitting/Fuel efficient vehicles ... right? Theoretically the parking spaces could all be taken up by LEVs and no one carpooling would have any incentive.So you might as well separate them.