See all forum discussions about NC-v4.1 SSc2

Subscribe to new posts about NC-v4.1 SSc2 Post a new question aboutNC-v4.1 SSc2

See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-v4.1 SSc2»

Forum discussion

NC-v4.1 SSc2:Protect or Restore Habitat

100% greenfield site admissibility

Carla Rincon

Project coordinator, Sustainability

Lemay CO Inc

LEEDuser Basic Member

2 thumbs up

Project location :

Canada

February 6, 2023

Hello everyone,

Can you help me clarify if a 100% greenfield site, with no previously developped areas can traget this credit? The credit requires to "...Restore a portion of the site (including the building footprint) identified as previously disturbed". In the case of a greenfield site, can we calculate the % of the site to restore by using the building's footprint? or would we have to consider the entire project's footprint? (with parking lots and all hardscape areas?). We are already complying with the 1rst requirement which is to "Preserve and protect from all development and construction activity 40% of the greenfield area on the site ".

Thank you in advance for your help

Post a reply

Summer Minchew

Managing Partner

Ecoimpact Consulting

LEEDuser Expert

171 thumbs up

Mon, 02/06/2023 - 15:50

My understanding is projects that are 100% greenfield cannot pursue this credit under LEED v4.1 because they cannot meet the restoration requirement.

Carla Rincon

Project coordinator, Sustainability

Lemay CO Inc

LEEDuser Basic Member

2 thumbs up

Mon, 02/06/2023 - 20:17

Thank you Summer, thanks for confirming that, nevertheless, I do not understand the logic, I think it would be beneficial to target this credit even for greenfield sites, since the project itself will be mineralizing the site, and in this case the greenfield site has little to no biodiversity, so there is an opportunity to improove the site... our project will still apply the suggested strategies, it's a shame we will not be able to apply for the credit.

Soha ElYamany

LEEDuser Basic Member

1 thumbs up

Wed, 11/01/2023 - 14:05

Hi Carla , I was wondering if the strategy worked, as I have a 100% greenfield site as well.

Talia Mamayek

Sustainability Consultant

WSP

LEEDuser Expert

0 thumbs up

Tue, 01/02/2024 - 16:47

Hi Carla, What was your final decision? Did you end up pursuing the credit for restoring a portion of the site?

Loren Lobbestael

LEEDuser Basic Member

0 thumbs up

Mon, 06/03/2024 - 18:22

Has anyone received an interpretation on this credit yet?

Andrey Kuznetsov

ESG consultant, LEED AP BD+C

Self Employed

LEEDuser Basic Member

36 thumbs up

Tue, 06/04/2024 - 05:33

I failed to catch the initial problem - since the intent of the credit says "To conserve existing natural areas and restore damaged areas to provide habitat and promote biodiversity". You have natural areas (actually - all your site is natural area). So conserve it per credit requirements: 1. Preserve and protect from all development and construction activity 40% of the greenfield area on the site (if such areas exist). At your site such area exists and it's 100 % - so you need preserve and protect 40 % of the site area. 2. You quoted not the whole requirement. In whole this senctence states "Restore a portion of the site, including the building footprint, identified as previously disturbed (if such areas exist) and follow vegetation and soil requirements below". The "if such areas exist" even in the refguide is stressed by italics. So you don not have previously disturbed area. You need only to leave 40 % of the project area intact. It can be a problem and tricky for a project, but it'is not preventing 100 % greenfield sites from gaining points. Where I'm wrong?

Zeynep Cakir

LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP, Sustainable Building Consultant

ECOBUILD

LEEDuser Basic Member

14 thumbs up

Tue, 06/04/2024 - 07:49

Hi Carla, We also had a similar case in the past and contacted GBCI to get clarification. Here is what we received from the GBCI: 'When using this version of the LEED v4.1 credit, projects that have 100% greenfield area cannot earn this credit. The credit requires both protection of greenfield areas as well as restoration of developed areas. Since offsite restoration / financial support is no longer an option, the project would need to restore previously developed areas of the site in order to earn this credit.'

Zeynep Cakir

LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP, Sustainable Building Consultant

ECOBUILD

LEEDuser Basic Member

14 thumbs up

Tue, 06/04/2024 - 08:09

Andrey, You are right. The statement 'if such areas exist' looks confusing. The GBCI response I posted above was received before the credit language change (ID# 100002582).

Andrey Kuznetsov

ESG consultant, LEED AP BD+C

Self Employed

LEEDuser Basic Member

36 thumbs up

Tue, 06/04/2024 - 09:08

Thank you for sharing this data. Interesting that even previous credit language wasn't preventing directly 100% greenfield projects from earning this credit (from 2021 guide): "Restore a portion of the site (including the building footprint) identified as previously disturbed and follow vegetation and soil requirements below". You don't have land that identified as previously disturbed - do not restore it. So odd that GBCI decided so. I vonder how it's treated at v4.

Zeynep Cakir

LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP, Sustainable Building Consultant

ECOBUILD

LEEDuser Basic Member

14 thumbs up

Tue, 06/04/2024 - 11:25

I guess the 'AND' in the credit language prevents 100% greenfield sites from earning the credit. We also had v4 experience with 100% greenfield sites. In v4, the only pathway for compliance was through Option 2. Financial Support. At least there was a way to earn credit by contributing to offsite restoration. Still, it's weird that protection of some portion of the greenfield site for projects without any previously disturbed areas is not awarded. Giving partial credit for protection and restoration would be better in my opinion. This may be raised in LEED v5 public comments.