Schools 2009 SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles

Miranda, I don't think this is an option under Schools -- it's not in the credit language.

It's not specified which population it's for, but I would assume that since it's a Schools-specific provision it is generally thought of for parents/students.

Have you considered Option 2—the LE/FE fleet option?

yeah - that is a district wide change that would take years.

I'm not sure what else to suggest—it strikes me as a case where if you don't meet the requirements because they're not appropriate for your project, or not practical, you're out of luck on the credit. Which happens a lot, of course.

This is a common issue on campus projects. Projects typically use either campus parking codes or city codes to determine the number of total parking spaces that should be "allocated" to the building pursuing certification for the purposes of calculating the required number of preferred parkingPreferred parking, available to particular users, includes designated spaces close to the building (aside from designated handicapped spots), designated covered spaces, discounted parking passes, and guaranteed passes in a lottery system. spaces. If no parking codes exist, you can check previous CIRS referencing the ITE parking calculation method, which helps you determine the total parking for your project. You will also need to make arrangements with the college to somehow reserve these spaces for use by the occupants of the building pursuing certification.

Alison, I'll see what I can do. Thanks for asking.

This is a good question, and you may have identified a situation that is unique to daycare projects. I would suggest that you submit a CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide explaining your approach to get an official ruling from USGBC on this one. I wish I could provide more help!

Anish we have some suggestions on how to enforce this in the Operations & Maintenance section of the Checklists tab, above. These are distilled from quite a bit of project experience.

Karen, I agree with your thought regarding the dedicated carpool drop-off lane. Shouldn't the intent of the credit be voided for carpool drop-off if the project is demstrated at least 80% of the school boundaries are within walking distance? The intent of this credit would be to encourage low-emitting vehicle drivers for FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories..

Hi Lindsey: Nice to hear from someone so experienced with LEED-S projects! We did consider limiting the parent drop-off lane to carpools (fuel-efficient or not), but the last thing any Principal wants is to have her staff confronting angry parents who feel it is their "right" to let their only child have an extra 1/2 hour sleep and then drive them to the door. To be fair, carpooling and walking are hard on working parents, who don't have the time to walk with children, then go back to work. My kids were able to walk to school by themselves, but that was years ago and the culture has changed. I wish USGBC would share good ideas--I bet there is a LEED school that came up with a great alternative transportation plan and got ID credit for it!

Has it been confirmed that the carpool drop-off area be specifically designated for low-emitting and fuel efficient vehicles? When I read the verbage in the Reference Manual (page 64), I do not interpret it to mean that the drop-off area has to be designated for L.E. & F.E. vehicles, only that the a specific area must be designated as a "carpool drop-off area" with signage that reminds and encourages carpooling to building occupants. If a second, or additional drop-off area was created just for L.E. & F.E. vehicles, that would increase the paved area of the site (bad for many reasons). Anyone have experience or a CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide that gives some clarification on this?

I see your point, and agree that this is somewhat confusing. My interpretation here is that the credit requirements on p.61 of the Reference Guide explicitly state that a "designated carpool drop-off area for LE and FE vehicles" must be provided. The paragraph in the “Implementation” section that you referenced states that the designated drop off area should be "situated to effectively manage the traffic patterns of carpool users, on-site parkers and buses." I think this is referring to the placement of the designated lane to minimize impedance to other traffic flows. I do not think this was intended to mean the designated carpool lane could be used by carpoolers not driving LE & FEs.

Now I am confused. I thought the carpool drop off area was for SSc4.3, not 4.4. My question relates to the designated area for carpool (School) for fuel efficient vehicles. The parking spaces are not a problem. If the carpool area has two lanes, can the interior lane be the designated area for those vehicles or does it have to be located somewhere completely different?