See all forum discussions about CI-2009 SSc3.3
 Subscribe to new posts about CI-2009 SSc3.3 Post a new question aboutCI-2009 SSc3.3
See LEEDuser’s guidance on CI-2009 SSc3.3»
FAQs about SSc3.3 :

Why are the CI designated parking requirements in Cases 1 and & 2 Option 1 determined by a Full Time Equivalent of tenant space/building while for New Construction the requirements are simply a percentage of parking provided?

If a CI project occupies a building that has existing parking, but no designated parking to the tenant, can it pursue “no parking will be provided"?

View answers »

Forum discussion

CI-2009 SSc3.3:Alternative Transportation—Parking Availability

Library: number of spaces and type of markings for Car/Vanpool or Fuel Efficient Vehicles

We are rennovating the interior only of a public library, no new parking is being added as part of this project, however, we are hoping to qualify for the 3.3 credits. Two questions:

(1) Our CI SSc3.3 v2009 form seems to indicate that we only need to provide reserved car/van pool spaces, not fuel efficient vehicles. Is this the case or do we need to provide reserved spaces for both car/van pools and fuel efficient vehicles? And if we provide both, what percentage of each do we need to provide of each or can they be all combined into one type of signage?

(2) As I'm filling out the form SSc3.3 v2009, it seems to request we provide only enough reserved spaces to cover 5% of the building FTE (Full Time Equivalent Occupants), not the existing amount of parking, or the FTE + peak transients (as it does with the bicycle storage). As you can imagine, our FTE is quite small, but our peak transients is quite large (characteristic of a library), also our excisting parking capacity is much larger than the FTE. I'm inclined to think that we are required to provide 5% of exisitng parking spaces as reserved, but the form is not clear and the numbers are quite different. Could someone clarify?

0
Post a reply

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Default Avatar
Kristina Bach
VP of Innovation
Sustainable Investment Group
LEEDuser Basic Member
110 thumbs up

Wed, 09/27/2017 - 12:54

1) CIv2009 only addresses car/vanpool parking. So while you can reserve spaces for low-emitting vehicles, these would not count toward the minimum number of car/vanpool spaces required for SSc3.3. If you want to provide both car/vanpool and low-emitting parking spaces, I recommend doing it separately to avoid any potential issues during review (I have heard of some projects having issues with combined signage approaches). Pay more attention to getting the number/location of the car/vanpool spaces correct for LEED than the other low-emitting paces. 2) Correct, CI projects are required to provide the parking based on their staff (FTE) rather than the lot size. This is generally due to the assumption that CI projects only occupy a portion of the base building and so the lot is shared with other tenants in the building/your occupants only utilize a subset of the overall total spaces. That isn't always the case obviously. There is a LEED Interpretation (5218) that specifically allows CIv2009 projects to meet this credit via the NCv2009 requirements (i.e. 5% of total lot capacity). You're only eligible for that, however, when the total provided parking spaces does not exceed 20% capacity for the total staff (for example - you have 200 staff but only 20 parking spaces -i.e. parking for 10% of staff). This does not sound like it applies in your case. Best practice would be to provide the preferred spots based on the lot capacity as you propose as you're right - your usage type will equate to a much higher portion of visitors than staff. But the bare minimum to get the credit in CIv2009 is going to be making sure you hit that 5% of FTE minimum.

Add new comment

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