We are submitting the following appeal to the USGBC Project Manager\'s Ruling of a CIR in the Sustainable Sites category, Credit SS-4.4. The Credit Interpretation Request was submitted on 12/27/2001 for the 20 River Terrace Project. The CIR asked for clarification on the requirements of this credit in the context of an urban project with no minimum parking standards, and in the context of a multi-family residential building. We are appealing the ruling based on the following additional project information. In Manhattan there are no minimum parking capacity requirements for residential buildings in our zoning classification; rather, there is a parking capacity allowance, which is one space for every 5 residential units (20%). For our project, the number of parking spaces provided is 48, and the number of apartment units is 292 (Note: the number of parking spaces and apartment units has changed since the initial CIR was submitted). The project therefore has provided approximately 20% fewer spaces than zoning allows. We assume this meets the first requirement of this credit. For the second credit requirement (preferred parking for carpooling), the Council agreed with our designation of carpooling as a destination concept, rather than an origination concept. However, the Council states in the Ruling that the project should provide means for encouraging increased HOV usage (e.g., through flex car parking, carpool drop-offs, rider boards) and provide a calculation that indicates how increased HOV utilization is accomplished. In our project, the parking garage is leased to a separate operating company (a typical practice in New York City); therefore the parking spaces are not reserved for the building residents. The spaces will be available to the general public, and are not under the control of the general building management. We will provide rider boards in the building to encourage carpooling to other destinations and provisions for a drop-off area; however, we cannot make a direct correlation as to how this will increase the use of HOVs - this depends on the actions of the residents themselves. In summary, we believe that by reducing the number of spaces below what is allowed by zoning, and by providing rider boards and a drop-off area for the building residents, we have sufficiently met the intent of this credit in a multi-family residential context.
Your appeal presented a challenging case. LEED credits do not necessarily apply to all types of projects. Carpooling is not normally applicable to residential projects. Further limitations of this project, due to the garage\'s operation being leased to a third party, contribute to this issue. The Credit Ruling Committee has decided to approve your appeal. The point will be awarded if sufficiently documented, based the following combination of features: (1) a carpool rider board easily found and viewable by residents; (2) a clearly marked drop-off area (at the building entrance or nearest to parking garage elevator and/or stairs) that allows 30 minute parking for at least one vehicle - dedicated to carpool vehicles only (delivering or receiving passengers); and (3) exemplary parking reductions. Exemplary parking reductions have been achieved for this project, as described below. Recent rulings for LEED certifications have established a minimum LEED requirement for use in localities with no minimum parking requirements: (1)the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) "Parking Generation" study (at www.ite.org) is to be referenced to find the applicable parking use statistic, per building type; and (2) the LEED project must have at least 25% less parking spaces than the statistic in order to comply. The most recent ITE Parking Generation study was published in 1987. LEED practitioners must reference the new edition when it is released in 2003. Exemplary performance requires a 75% reduction compared to the relevant ITE Parking Generation statistic. The statistic for observed high-rise residential parking is 0.88 spaces per occupied dwelling. Your project beats this statistic by 83%. Other types of projects (commercial, etc.) may also apply this ruling as appropriate.