Site Boundary

69 replies [Last post]
Feb 25 2010 Guest
137 Thumbs Up
Post a Comment

I have a question regarding the site boundary in a project that will be registered for LEED-NC.  The building is existing and the entire northern half is corporate office space that will be totally renovated including new HVAC system. The southern half of the building is the company's warehouse which is connected by two corridors to a separate manufacturing building.  Could there be any problem with drawing the site boundary line directly through the building where the office is separated from the warehouse?  The office space can be completely closed off by locking doors from the warehouse and there is no overlap in occupancy.

Editor's Note: Good news for site boundary questions—LEEDuser now has a dedicated forum for MPR3, with guidance on that page that helps address many questions. Please post discussion questions and comments there. Thanks!

69 Comments

0
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser BuildingGreen, Inc.
Nov 22 2012
LEEDuser Moderator

site boundary forum - MPR3

Good news for site boundary questions—LEEDuser now has a dedicated forum for MPR3, with guidance on that page that helps address many questions. Please post discussion questions and comments there. Thanks!

Post a Reply
0
0
Green Builder Employee Consulting Firm
Nov 16 2012
LEEDuser Member
801 Thumbs Up

LEED boundary to include displaced parking lot?

My project is a new residential tower (with an underground parking garage), which will be constructed on an existing parking lot that serves an adjacent residential tower. Because the adjacent residential tower will lose their parking lot, my project will be constructing a new parking lot (along with new green space) in the area between the two buildings. I am unsure if the new parking lot should be included in my LEED site boundary, seeing as it does not serve our building residents or support our building operations. However, the new green space will be accessible to residents of both buildings and I feel that it therefore should be included in our LEED site boundary. Any advice on drawing the site boundary would be appreciated!

1
3
0
David Posada Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Nov 20 2012 LEEDuser Expert 16345 Thumbs Up

Good question!
When you read the MPR Supplemental Guidance v2 for MPR 3, item #1 says the LEED boundary should "include all land that was or will be disturbed for the purpose of undertaking the LEED project."

That suggests you'd include the new parking lot in your boundary, and include that area for the stormwater management, open space, and heat island credits. If your underground garage serves the your tower, you could write a narrative that explains how the parking spaces in the new surface lot aren't included in your parking counts for SSc4 since they serve the other building.

Now, MPR 3 item #2 says you LEED boundary should not include land owned by another party, "unless that land is associated with and supports the normal building operations" for your LEED building. If the existing adjacent tower is owned by a different party, you would then include the green space since it serves your building, but exclude the surface parking lot since it's owned by someone else. If there's separate ownership and you exclude the surface parking lot, you'll want that scope of work under a different contract, and you'll need to track those materials and costs separately from your LEED project.

If the same party owns both towers, that suggests including the new surface lot. You'll probably want to contact GBCI customer service for technical assistance on this question to get an official response since it's, well, an MPR, and might have contract or scope implications.

2
3
0
Green Builder Employee, Consulting Firm Nov 29 2012 LEEDuser Member 801 Thumbs Up

Thank you for your help! The adjacent tower and property is owned by a different party. I talked to the owner of my project, and to clarify, it appears that the green space is only intended for use by the adjacent tower's residents. Therefore, it may be best for us to only include our tower, since both the parking lot and green space are being constructed as a requirement of the purchase agreement of our site from the adjacent tower's owners. I will clarify this with GBCI customer service!

3
3
0
Green Builder Employee, Consulting Firm Dec 12 2012 LEEDuser Member 801 Thumbs Up

I did inquire with GBCI, and just as an FYI, this is their response: "It is noted on page 23 of the Supplemental Guidance to the Minimum Program Requirements, rev 2, Sep 2011 that all land disturbed for the project must be included in the LPB. So, while the parking provided for the adjacent residential tower should not be included in your parking calculations, the materials used and site conditions of that area need to be included. LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. ID# 10227, dated 10/1/2012, reinforces this point."

Post a Reply
0
0
Julie Blue Associate, AIA, LEED AP TMP Architecture, Inc.
May 10 2012
LEEDuser Member
326 Thumbs Up

LEED boundary partial addition over existing building

We are defining a LEED boundary for our 2009-NC project. This is an arena project on a campus with major additions at the perimeter of the arena. The arena and the new addtions define construction for the certificaiton. It is a (3) story facility. There is an existing 2-story building (separate address and building name) connected that is not included as part of the certification. The LEED boundary would be simple as we can use the disturbed area of the site excluding the existing connected building. My question is that on the third level, part of the new addition to the Arena extends over the existing building that is not part of the certification. How do we document the LEED boundary. Can we provide a floor by floor LEED boundary or explanation that excludes the existing building and then a separate LEED boundary that includes the third floor construction over that existing building?

1
2
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Jul 02 2012 LEEDuser Moderator

Julie, based on the LEED Minimum Program Requirements supplemental guidance document and the requirements about including a building in its entirety, I don't see how you can exclude the existing arena. However, GBCI has become more accommodating about these situations in the last year, so I may be missing something there.

On the boundary question, I would envision the boundary as being in three dimensions, going over the existing building, and make sure that you explain what's going on when possible.

2
2
0
Julie Blue Associate, AIA, LEED AP, TMP Architecture, Inc. Jul 02 2012 LEEDuser Member 326 Thumbs Up

Thanks Tristan - I am not sure my inital explanation was clear. We are including the existing Arena as part of the LEED boundary - it is the separate 2-story building adjacent that we are not including. This existing building is named separately, does not share any HVAC services, is metered completely separate and only connects via a single tunnel. I have contacted GBCI on this question as well - I will post once we have an answer. I plan to show the boundary via a building seciton as well as a site plan.

Post a Reply
0
0
Nanechka Pagan Architect, LEED GA Bayside Contractors, Inc.
May 03 2012
Guest
68 Thumbs Up

LEED Boundary

The project consist of the construction of a new middle school and the remodelation of the existing elementary school both will shared some areas like the existing parking and the electric substation. Only the new middle school will be pursuing LEED certification. The LEED boundary will include the existing parking area (with only the parking spaces required by code), but we don't know if the exisiting electric substation (this one will be replace with a new one, that will have the power to serve both school, actually serve only the existing school) need to be included inside the LEED boundary or we can leave it out. In addition we are proposing to add a sub-meter for LEED purpose, since it will be only one meter. Any suggestions?

1
1
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Sep 05 2012 LEEDuser Moderator

Nanechka, based on my reading of the LEED MPR Supplemental Guidance document, I would include the substation in your LEED boundary.

Post a Reply
0
0
Kerrie Kannberg Hutton Architecture Studio
May 02 2012
Guest
145 Thumbs Up

Non-LEED Certifiable buildings definition?

Hi,
In the MPR 2011 revisions there is mention of having a site boundary with either multiple LEED certifiable buildings within the boundary, thus using the AGMBC, or having Non-LEED Certifiable buildings. However, I have not had any luck finding a definition for either of these types of buildings.
In our case - a school, there is minimal work or no work being completed on these buildings (exterior electrical connections only to be brought to code). Can we exclude these from our LEED square footage, even though within the boundary of the complete site? Or do we simply jog the line around them? This is not a campus, but these aux. buildings always tend to pop up on k-12 school sites and bring up these questions.
Thanks!

1
1
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Jun 25 2012 LEEDuser Moderator

Kerrie, for more background on your question, please review the LEED Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs) supplemental guidance document (you can Google it). It discusses how to handle auxiliary buildings.

Post a Reply
0
0
Sherri von Wolfe
Apr 10 2012
Guest
85 Thumbs Up

LEED Boundary

Good afternoon,
We have an unusual campus project in which the majority of the project renovation and new construction is in the basement. (13,981sf renovated + 3,176sf new construction= basement footprint 15,931sf). Ground level LEED boundary is 11,960sf (and predominantly landscape).

While inserting P1f2 data, we became confused about how one establishes total site area for the LEED project boundary. Is it the boundary on ground level site (11,960sf)? ..or, is it the basement footprint plus additional landscape areaThe landscape area is the total site area less the building footprint, paved surfaces, water bodies, and patios. outside of the basement footprint?

Additionally, as the basement is excavated beyond the ground level interventions, this has implications on our interpretation of the hardscapeHardscape consists of the inanimate elements of the building landscaping. Examples include pavement, roadways, stone walls, concrete paths and sidewalks, and concrete, brick, and tile patios. outside of the building footprintBuilding footprint is the area on a project site used by the building structure, defined by the perimeter of the building plan. Parking lots, parking garages, landscapes, and other nonbuilding facilities are not included in the building footprint..

Thanks ahead of time for any insights. This is a new one for us.
Best,
Sherri

Post a Reply
0
0
Chris DeVolder 360 Architecture
Feb 06 2012
LEEDuser Member
211 Thumbs Up

LEED Site Boundary

Great forum and good information shared has answered a number of our questions, thanks!
On the site boundary for an urban campus public assembly building we're still not 100% on how to draw it. This is a facility that is used occassionally (maybe 10 times a year). There is an adjacent parking lot that is used daily throughout the year to access classrooms and the medical center. On the few times a year when our facility will be used the lot is used for the facility so does it become part of our boundary, even though the main use for the parking lot is for other buildings? Our facility is open daily but the parking lot is not used to support the normal building operations, just event days.
"The LEED project boundary must include all contiguous land that is associated with and supports normal building operations for the LEED project building, including all land that was or will be disturbed for the purpose of undertaking the LEED project"
Hope I'm making sense here?

1
2
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Feb 17 2012 LEEDuser Moderator

Chris, I think you need to look at this in terms of a campus situation, via the AGMBC. I would probably include the parking lot to be on the safe side, but if other buildings on the campus will be LEED certified, you may want to look at the campus as a whole in terms of where you place your boundaries.

2
2
0
Chris DeVolder 360 Architecture Mar 29 2012 LEEDuser Member 211 Thumbs Up

Is there a list where we could see if a Master Site has been established for a campus? The contact we've been given at the University will not return emails/phone calls (weird, eh?).
Now this parking lot is being renovated outside of our scope/design/construction control. Do we have to recalculate our credits based on this other design?
It seems counterintuitive that we would include this lot which is used by our project less than 2% per year and is now being 'redone' outside of our control......
Thanks!

Post a Reply
0
0
Cindy Estrada LEED AP BD&C SDS Architects, Inc.
Jan 19 2012
LEEDuser Member
360 Thumbs Up

Site Boundary

Phoebe,
The buildings must be physically distinct, and have unique addresses or names among other issues according to the Minimum Program Requirements Supplemental Guidance. Specifically, #3, there is lots of information for what you propose. Here's a link: http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=9552
Good Luck!

Post a Reply
0
0
Daniela Castro Salgado LEED AP BD+C / Architect Edmonds International Ltd
Jan 19 2012
Guest
540 Thumbs Up

LEED Project Boundary Changes

We have a project for which we are about to submitt precertification documentation.
There were changes to the original project boundary because the street will be widened. Can we change the incially registered site area, property area and LEED project boundary?
Thank you all for your help.

1
7
0
Larry Jones Associate, Atelier Ten Jan 19 2012 LEEDuser Expert 1726 Thumbs Up

I would say yes. But you have to be sure that any site credits that are affected by this change are updated as well. For instance if you hardscapeHardscape consists of the inanimate elements of the building landscaping. Examples include pavement, roadways, stone walls, concrete paths and sidewalks, and concrete, brick, and tile patios. area increased, you have to take this into account for SSc5 credits.

2
7
0
Daniela Castro Salgado LEED AP BD+C / Architect, Edmonds International Ltd Jan 19 2012 Guest 540 Thumbs Up

Absolutely. Thank you Larry.
Do you know if there would be any problem if the boundary changes from Precertification to Design or Construction Review?

3
7
0
Larry Jones Associate, Atelier Ten Jan 19 2012 LEEDuser Expert 1726 Thumbs Up

As long as nothing crazy has happened to your boundary and you're still meeting MPR #3, then my guess is no. Always good to provide a brief explanation of what happened to eliminate any doubt for the reviewer.

4
7
0
Daniela Castro Salgado LEED AP BD+C / Architect, Edmonds International Ltd Jan 20 2012 Guest 540 Thumbs Up

Ok. Thank you Larry. I'll will follow your advise.

5
7
0
Kerrie Kannberg Hutton Architecture Studio May 18 2012 Guest 145 Thumbs Up

Daniela, just wondering if you have received your response from GBCI as one of my projects has the same question...

Thanks!

6
7
0
Daniela Castro Salgado LEED AP BD+C / Architect, Edmonds International Ltd May 18 2012 Guest 540 Thumbs Up

Hi Kerrie,
Actually we received confirmation of Precertification yesterday. They didn't make any comment on the boundary changes, however I still have my doubts for the Construction Review...I guess I can only confirm we documented it correctly in one year from now.
If you get any answer before that, please let me know.
Thanks!

7
7
0
J.C. Douglass Environmental Scientist, Clark Nexsen Architecture & Engineering Jul 27 2012 LEEDuser Member 29 Thumbs Up

We had to make changes to our design based on client comments after we had already received Design Submittal approval on all the Master Site credits for a campus project. Our changes are relatively minor, so we went back and forth about the relevance of adjusting the LEED documentation after it has already been reviewed and approved by GBCI. In the end, we made the decision to redraw the impacted project boundaries, as appropriate, and recalculate the related site credits, so that all project documentation was consistent across all submittals. As such, we are planning on resubmitting these "anticipated" credits for GBCI's review during the Construction Submittal. We also decided to notify GBCI about the changes in advance, via the inquiry system, so they can confirm our approach before we click "Submit". We are awaiting confirmation of the approach - I will post the response here for future reference.

Post a Reply
0
0
Yasir Nurrahman Mr. Yasir PT. Indonesia Environment Consultant
Jan 12 2012
LEEDuser Member
566 Thumbs Up

Urban site

Associated with LEED 2009 NC under SS credit 2, what is the definition of urban site from LEED's point of view and what are the boundaries?

1
1
0
Emily Catacchio Sustainability Specialist, Wight and Company Jan 12 2012 Guest 6832 Thumbs Up

Satya,

I'd reccomend reposting this question under the credit specific forum for SS credit 2 here.

Post a Reply
0
0
Jennifer Turchin Sellen Sustainability
Nov 22 2011
LEEDuser Member
203 Thumbs Up

LEED Project Boundary - LEED NCv2.2

We have a hotel project that is 23 stories and was started and registered as a LEED NCv2.2 project in 2008. The design phase submittal was completed for the project and then at that time the owner placed the project on hold. The project was shelved for about a year with only the exterior of the project completed. During that time, the first floor was completed as suites (villas) and were not necessarily done to LEED standards. The remainder of the 23 stories is now being completed and we are preparing to submit for construction phase submittal. The question is how to handle the villas. Techincally, they should be excluded from the LEED boundary, but how do you do this if they were included during the design phase submittal and is USGBC/ GBCI going to allow a complete floor to be excluded from the project? If anyone has any information on a similar situation it woudl be appreciated. Thanks.

1
1
0
Emily Catacchio Sustainability Specialist, Wight and Company Nov 23 2011 Guest 6832 Thumbs Up

Hi Jennifer,

I doubt GBCI will allow a complete floor to be excluded from an NC project. I would reccomend contacting GBCI directly about this question.

My only thought is that you could try to start over and call your NC project an addition, in an attempt to wholly exclude that floor. But I'm not sure this would work, and I'm not sure you can start over.

Again, you should contact GBCI.

Post a Reply
0
0
Scott Scales Project Manager Peter Gluck and Partners
Oct 27 2011
Guest
25 Thumbs Up

New building overlapping an existing LEED property boundary

We are designing a new building on a site adjacent to an existing LEED v2.2 certified building (designed by another architect); both buildings are owned and operated by the same entitiy and there are multiple existing buildings (non LEED) and infrastructure. Recently, we recieved the LEED property boundary for the adjacent building and have found that our new building is currently designed partially within this boundary. Can we redefine or use a portion of the existing building's project boundary for our project without having follow the guidlines of the AGMBC? Currently there is no LEED Campus Boundary defined for this site. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Scott

1
2
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Nov 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

Scott, my understanding is that the AGMBC is an optional tool, and not something that you are required to apply in a situation like yours.

The issue I would worry about here is double-counting of site features—features that benefited the first LEED project and that will now benefit the second. I am not completely sure that this is an issue, and I can't think of an example, but it's something to watch for.

2
2
0
Cindy Estrada LEED AP BD&C, SDS Architects, Inc. Dec 05 2011 LEEDuser Member 360 Thumbs Up

Scott,
Tristan is right about double counting; SSc4.4, may have an impact depending on the option used; as well as SSc5.2 if the original project had "Dedicated Open Space" within the LEED Boundary. Check also on the stormwater and water efficient lanscaping credits.

Post a Reply
0
0
Melissa Wrolstad Senior Project Manager CodeGreen Solutions
Sep 27 2011
LEEDuser Member
1679 Thumbs Up

Guardbooth

I have a project targeting LEED certification where the LEED Site Boundary is drawn around the parking lot surrounding the building. There is a small guard booth being constructed within this LEED Site Boundary at the entrance to the parking lot. The guard booth has a small AC unit and lighting.

Does this guard booth need to be included in LEED calculations for the building (e.g. energy modeling, lighting power density, controllability of systems, etc.) or can it be disregarded in all credit calculations?

1
2
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Nov 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

Melissa, check the LEED Minimum Program Requirements supplemental guidance. I recall that there is some allowance for disregarding auxiliary buildings like this.

2
2
0
RIM Architects RIM Architects Mar 28 2013 LEEDuser Member 27 Thumbs Up

I had to research the same issue. It seems that the MPR guidance has changed a bit from the original version (2010) to rev2 (09/01/2011). In the original version, you could exclude small structures that did not meet the MPR (and were therefore not certifiable). It now seems that you should include them, treated as an extension of the main building in relevant credits. Here's the language (I noticed that it says 'can' - not 'must' or 'shall').

from MPR Guidance Rev2; p26
"If there is a non-LEED-certifiable building within the LEED project boundary, the project team can include the non-certifying building within the project boundary in ALL relevant submittals that are allowed and appropriate for each individual credit and prerequisite, essentially treating the non-certifying building as an extension of the certifying building."

Post a Reply
0
0
Dana Murdoch
Jul 13 2011
Guest
747 Thumbs Up

Campus Reasonable Site Boundary

I am working on the documentation for a 2009 LEED-NC renovation of a single campus residence hall. I would love some clarification on a few items.

1. In the MPR 3 Language it states "LEED projects located on a campus must have project boundaries such that if all the buildings on campus become LEED certified, then 100% of the gross land area on the campus would be included with in a LEED Boundary. If this requirement is in conflict with MPR #7, then MPR #7 will take precendence."

Does this mean I have to include the whole campus in the property area of the project? Or is it more of a jigsaw puzzle idea, so as the different buildings hypothetically get LEED certified the entire campus property would eventually be included?

2. Since the residence hall is a single campus project, does it need to go through the AGMBC 2010? The application guide states that project teams may use the guidance when pursuing certification of two or more LEED Projects. I only have one project, so I don't qualify, right?

1
1
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Nov 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

Dana, I picture it as more of a jigsaw than including the whole campus in one LEED project boundary.

I don't think you're required to use the AGMBC, given that this is one project.

Post a Reply
0
0
Veronika Sundberg Environmental Engineer - Certification Skanska Sverige AB
Jun 13 2011
LEEDuser Member
1343 Thumbs Up

FTE/Residence number for CHILDREN at a hospital project

In the 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. calculation for our Hospital project we do not address the numbers of children that are visiting the hospital.
All inpatients are considered Residential and the all outpatients are calculated as visitors.

Should we consider the number of children visiting the hospital in some way and in some calculations (e.g. water calculations?) ?

Any input would be great,
Thanks /Veronika

1
1
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Nov 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

Veronika, sorry for the slow reply to your question, but could you please post this under our FTE forum? THanks!

Post a Reply
0
0
Xavi B
Jun 07 2011
Guest
2251 Thumbs Up

MPR 3.

According to MPR 3 , 1. "The LEED project boundary must include all contiguous land that is associated with and supports normal building operations for the LEED project building, including all land that was or will be disturbed for the purpose of undertaking the LEED project".
This is an existing facility and there will be a building to retrofit. There is a parking lot right next to the retrofit; it will be used for materials stock, temporary workers constructions, and construction activities for the space to retrofit. Can I leave it out of the boundary? Technically I'm not disturbing the land, since this was a parking lot and still will be after construction.
Also it is not clear to me if including existing parking capacity is required, since there will be no new parking spaces, can I just draw my boundary around the building to retrofit??
Thanks

1
7
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Jun 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

Xavi, I assume the parking lot is used for the building under normal operations? If so, it should be included within your LEED boundary. Parking is considered normal operations relative to the MPR text you quoted.

2
7
0
Xavi B Jun 09 2011 Guest 2251 Thumbs Up

Thanks Tristan. What if the parking lot we are using for materials stock is for the warehouse. And there is another parking lot for the office building. Can I leave it out of the boundary even thogh it's being used for the LEED project materials stock.

3
7
0
KC Kurtz Designer-Builder, Buildsense + Studio B Architecture Jul 12 2011 Guest 154 Thumbs Up

Tristan --

Thanks to you, and others, for the wealth of information on this site!
This is the first LEED project for everyone in my office and so this site
has really been invaluable to our, as yet, less-than-perfectly-coordinated
process. Thanks again.

This is a question in a very similar vein to Xavi's above, however, even
after reading the MRP Supplemental Guidance, I
am still unclear as to where I should draw my LEED Project Boundary

Here's our situation:

We own 2 urban properties separated by a city road.

The first property,
and the one that we will develop as our C and S LEED project, is an existing
one story building (former automotive shop). We are planning on
engaging in adaptive reuseAdapted reuse is the renovation of a space for a purpose different from the original., utilizing the existing brick perimeter
walls and steel structure, for the first floor (6200 sf), and adding a
second floor (5800 sf), to create a 12,000 sf (approximate) mixed
use office building. This property is mostly zero lot line with a small
amount (350 sf) of pervious area that will be landscaped.

The second property on the other side of the city street is a parking
lot that we do not want to include in our Project Boundary --
We hope to do a separate LEED NC project here (Alternative Fueling
Station) at some point in the relatively near future. Until the Fueling
Station project is complete (and potentially beyond that point) we will
use this property as parking for property 1.

A third property, which we do not own, is a parking lot and storage buildings,
and is contiguous to the first property (LEED project building).
We have permission from the property owner (also the owner who
sold us property 1 and property 2) to use the parking lot and
storage buildings to stage material and equipment during construction.
We will also place our construction dumpster/recycling in this parking
lot during construction and we will extend our construction fence
(chainlink) onto this property. After construction, we will not use property
three for any purpose.

OK - so here's my question:

Can we draw the Project Boundary around the Project Building (property
line) only or do we need to draw it around (and therefore include in
all related credit/prerequisite calculations and documentation) property
3 (temporary staging area that we don't own)?

Many thanks.

4
7
0
David Posada Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Jul 12 2011 LEEDuser Expert 16345 Thumbs Up

It sounds like the third property is a previously developedPreviously developed sites are those altered by paving, construction, and/or land use that would typically have required regulatory permitting to have been initiated (alterations may exist now or in the past). Previously developed land includes a platted lot on which a building was constructed if the lot is no more than 1 acre; previous development on lots larger than 1 acre is defined as the development footprint and land alterations associated with the footprint. Land that is not previously developed and altered landscapes resulting from current or historical clearing or filling, agricultural or forestry use, or preserved natural area use are considered undeveloped land. The date of previous development permit issuance constitutes the date of previous development, but permit issuance in itself does not constitute previous development.", urban lot that is being used for temporary staging of construction activities, and is not a greenfield area that is receiving any site disturbance (as would be addressed by SSc5.1). If there are no permanent improvements to this area that will support the building on site 1, it sounds reasonable to exclude it from the LEED Site Boundary.

If the second property were to be redeveloped to provide permanent parking for the site 1 project, you would need to include it in the LEED boundary for site 1. If the local zoning requires you to provide parking, it seems like you'd have to include that area within your LEED boundary

If you are not required to provide parking, and If the second property were legitimately being used for only temporary parking for site 1, you might be able to argue it should be excluded from the site boundary, because it wouldn't be supporting the building, but then you could not use that area for any of the site credits such as SSc4.3 or SSc5 or SSc6.

GBCI gives project teams some latitude to define the boundary as they see fit, but if the parking is required it seems like you'd need to include it.

5
7
0
KC Kurtz Designer-Builder, Buildsense + Studio B Architecture Jul 13 2011 Guest 154 Thumbs Up

Thanks for your thoughtful reply David - It was very helpful.

With regards to property 2 referred to above, I am basing my understanding of Project Boundary exclusion on four pieces of information:

a) MPR Language -- "The LEED project boundary must include all contiguous land that is associated with and supports normal building operations for the LEED project building, including all land that was or will be disturbed for the purpose of undertaking the LEED project".
This parking lot is not "contiguous" to our LEED project building, but rather, it is separated by a city street (public right-of-way).

b) MPR Supplemental Guidance Revision #1 -- "When non-contiguous parcels [MAY] be included within the LEED project boundary: Non-contiguous parcels of land [MAY] be included within the LEED project boundary if the conditions below are met, and at the [PROJECT TEAM'S DISCRETION]...."

The "may" and "discretion" language implies to me that the corollary would also be true -- we may also choose NOT to include this non-contiguous land within the LEED project boundary.

c) Also, our local zoning does not require parking for this property - we are considered "Downtown Exempt".

d) It was also encouraging to hear, from you, that GBCI "gives project teams some latitude to define the boundary as they see fit...".

Also, as mentioned in my first post, we are considering developing this parking lot, using LEED NC, as an alternative fueling station (biodiesel, cng, and electric plug-ins), at some point in the future.

So, all this being said, I'd love to get a follow-up response from you on this issue of project boundaries.

Thanks again for your help!

6
7
0
David Posada Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Jul 18 2011 LEEDuser Expert 16345 Thumbs Up

KC,
I'd agree that the lack of a parking requirement and the MPR language on page 23 of the new guidance that says "may be included" and "at the project teams discretion" suggests you some latitude here to draw the boundary as you see appropriate. (Also check the conditions for exclusion at the top of pg 24.) I can't say for sure how a reviewer will interpret the MPRs, but your approach seems reasonable.

7
7
0
KC Kurtz Designer-Builder, Buildsense + Studio B Architecture Jul 19 2011 Guest 154 Thumbs Up

Thanks, David - fingers crossed....

Post a Reply
0
0
Xavi B
Jun 06 2011
Guest
2251 Thumbs Up

Common services

This is a retrofit of an existing office building within a medium manufacturing company. The office building is about 5000sq ft and the overall facility about
100 000sq ft. Since this is an existing space, storm water, sewer system, potable and electrical systems are shared with all the facility. Can I leave out of the boundary all those services, treatment plant, storm and sewer pipes and collectors, potable waterPotable water meets or exceeds EPA's drinking water quality standards and is approved for human consumption by the state or local authorities having jurisdiction; it may be supplied from wells or municipal water systems. pumping systems, etc. If not, I would have all the facility within the boundary, which don't make sense to me. At this moment I'm taking into account the office space and some hard-scape amenities such as sidewalks, parking lot and car entry to the property since those are used by the construction trucks. What do you think about my approach. Many thanks.

1
1
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Jun 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

Xavi, stormwater treatment infratstructure, etc. is considered as supporting normal operations and in that sense should be included in the LEED boundary for that reason. On the other hand, since that infrastructure is shared with other facilities on the site, the LEED MPR supplemental guidance gives you discretion on apportioning it with other buildings, so you should be able to do that. Just do it consistently across all credits.

Post a Reply
0
0
James Weingarten Electrical Designer MEP Associates
Apr 14 2011
Guest
113 Thumbs Up

Waterfront sites

Can a project boundary extend into a lake? I have a Department of Natural Resources building located on a lakefront. They have a public boat landing on site. I must object to leaving the dock and boat ramp in darkness. However, if I light it I would be over the project boundary and beyond 15' would be more than .01fc.

Anyone have any LEED experience with waterfront sites project boundaries?

1
4
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. May 19 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

James, I would simply put the boat landing within the project boundary. I can't think of any reason why this should be avoided.

2
4
0
James Weingarten Electrical Designer, MEP Associates May 19 2011 Guest 113 Thumbs Up

Really?
Of course the boat landing is within the boundary. Can the boundary extend into a lake is the question. In the summer, the dock would need to be illuminated such that boaters can safely navigate to it. In the winter the landing is essentially a public road to provide access to the lake for ice fishing, so it should also be illuminated. Hence the reason to ask if the boundary can extend into the body of water to include the dock. Simply doing what you suggest in this matter does not address the issue.

3
4
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. May 19 2011 LEEDuser Moderator

I am not sure why it doesn't address the issue, or why the boundary can't extend into the water?

It sounds like it is basically part of the LEED project, so should be included. I can't think of anything in the LEED MPR's that would exclude it, although it certainly is a little unusual. Have you had any feedback from GBCI or anyone else on this?

4
4
0
David Posada Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Jun 21 2011 LEEDuser Expert 16345 Thumbs Up

James,
See the comment under your SSc8 post for "Waterfont sites"

Post a Reply
0
0
deborah lucking associate fentress architects
Jan 10 2011
LEEDuser Member
1146 Thumbs Up

LEED boundary, property line and limit of work

Thought I'll share this with everyone. We wrote to USGBC for clarification on whether the LEED boundary should extend to the limit of work on an urban site (where we are requested by the City to do some work on curbs, sidewalks and streetlights). The MPR language was ambiguous.

USGBC replied that we should use the property line and further, that "Version 2 of the MPR Supplemental Guidance, forthcoming, will include guidance addressing this issue".

1
3
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Jun 07 2011 LEEDuser Moderator
2
3
0
deborah lucking associate, fentress architects Jun 08 2011 LEEDuser Member 1146 Thumbs Up

Tristan, many thanks! Your updates alone are worth the price of admission.

3
3
0
Hsin Yi Hsieh Mar 13 2012 LEEDuser Member 378 Thumbs Up

Thank you for sharing this information, but I am still a little bit confused. So the conclusion is using property line or limit of work?

Post a Reply
0
0
Sue Macomber Sustainability Consultant: Senior Project Manager Viridian
May 03 2010
LEEDuser Member
2816 Thumbs Up

Contiguous LEED Boundary with parking

My current project is an addition to an existing building in a campus setting. The addition is on the southwest side of the existing building. Only the newq addition will be certified. Currently the LEED boundary is drawn through the where the addition will be the existing building. However, additional parking is required per the project and will be located to the North of the new addition on the other side of existing parking. The new parking is no where near the addition. It is unclear to me how to draw a LEED boundary to include this parking area without hurting our chances for credits such as SSC7.1 Heat Island EffectHeat island effect refers to the absorption of heat by hardscapes, such as dark, nonreflective pavement and buildings, and its radiation to surrounding areas. Other sources may include vehicle exhaust, air-conditioners, and street equipment. Reduced airflow because of tall buildings and narrow streets exacerbate the effect. - Non-roof. Is it possible to separate the LEED boundary or must I include everything?

Thanks,

1
3
0
Mara Baum Healthcare Sustainable Design Leader, HOK May 12 2010 LEEDuser Expert 6857 Thumbs Up

I would consider the parking to be a separate project and exclude the parking from the site boundary. Given that LEED prohibits you from gerrymandering or otherwise creating strange site boundaries, I think this is reasonable. However, if you are trying to achieve either SSc4.2 or 4.3 you may be forced into campus-wide parking calculations -- I'm not sure. You may want to review the LEED NC Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects.

2
3
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. May 14 2010 LEEDuser Moderator

I would also suggest that you check the SSc4.4 forum for a discussion on a related topic.

 

3
3
0
Jean Marais b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert May 17 2010 LEEDuser Member 7169 Thumbs Up

I would include the parking as part of the project if it is an integral part of normal building operation. The fact that the parking addition was required says to me that it is.

"1. The LEED project boundary must include all contiguous land that is associated with and supports normal building operations for the LEED project building, including all land that was or will be disturbed for the purpose of undertaking the LEED project
2. The LEED project boundary may not include land that is owned by a party other than that which owns the LEED project unless that land is associated with and supports normal building operations for the LEED project building.." - MPR 3
http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6715

Post a Reply
0
0
Jean Marais b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert
Mar 04 2010
LEEDuser Member
7169 Thumbs Up

From a theme point of view it

From a theme point of view it fits the CI better. NC has many aspects associated with what goes on outside the building, on the roof, hardscapes, stormwater, etc. CI is aimed at people who don't have much influence over things like if the roof is painted white and the hardscape is pourous. If CS was used when the building was built and assumed the tenant would build out his own HVAC distributions, then CI would be the perfect follow up. How much of the existing HVAC will be used?

1
1
0
Phoebe Kincaid Mar 04 2010 Guest 137 Thumbs Up

I really appreciate your input. I agree CI seems like it will be a better fit for the project. We excluded it originally because of the owner occupancy issue. The entire HVAC system and plumbing fixtures will be replaced for the Corp Office Renovation. Mechanicals are not shared between the Corp Office and the Warehouse.
The building is fairly old and definitely NOT build to LEED-CS. We do qualify for several Site Selection credits though and are not unduly penalized under the NC system even though we are not planning to pursue any of the credits as they pertain to roof or landscaping other than lighting.

Post a Reply
0
0
Phoebe Kincaid
Mar 04 2010
Guest
137 Thumbs Up

Which rating system: LEED-NC or LEED-CI?

In the "LEED 2009 Supplemental MPR Guidance" document we found that there is an exception that may allow an owner occupied building to qualify under LEED-CI rather than NC (page 10). It seems we are in a bit of grey area as to which rating system to use for this project and even if either will result in an acceptable boundary line.

The building is an existing building, 100% owner occupied & managed, with horizontal separation by a party wall that separates “National Corporate Offices” from “NJ Distribution Warehouse”. Much of the warehouse is a recent addition and is largely unconditioned space and there are no plans to renovate any part of the warehouse. Renovations to the Corporate Offices will include gut interior renovation and new mechanicals.

Per checklist/scorecard, the project stands to earn approximately the same number of points under either rating system. Is there any benefit to the pursuit of LEED-NC over LEED-CI and if for some reason the requirements are interpreted as not being met after project registration for LEED-CI, may we attempt to switch to LEED-NC?

Post a Reply
0
0
Phoebe Kincaid
Mar 02 2010
Guest
137 Thumbs Up

Site Boundary Through Existing Building

I would appreciate any input from anyone on this subject as I have had no luck getting clarification from USGBC.
Thanks

1
3
0
Shannon Gray Consultant, YRG sustainability Mar 03 2010 Guest 3631 Thumbs Up

Phoebe,

Below are the Minimum Program Requirements from the USGBC. This should help to answer your question. Let us know if you have more specific questions after reading this.

LEED projects must include the new, ground-up design and construction, or major renovation, of at least one building in its entirety.

Specific Allowed Exceptions:
Horizontally attached buildings (including additions).
Horizontally attached buildings may be certified independently provided that the following two conditions are met:
a) they are physically distinct (see definition in Glossary)
b) they have unique addresses or names.

If these conditions are not met, the structure is considered a single building and must be ertified as such.

Physically Distinct: The condition in which a building has both of the following:
a) exterior walls that are party walls or are separate from adjoining buildings by air space
b) lighting, HVAC, plumbing, and other mechanical systems that are separate from the systems of adjoining buildings. LEED project boundary lines that “slice” through party walls must not pass through any mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP) service infrastructure. Exceptions include buildings served by a common or shared chiller plant or heating water, or steam supply pipes (i.e., not air ducts), and only if the thermal energy serving the structure to be separated is sub‐metered.

Thanks,
Shannon

2
3
0
Xavi B Jun 07 2011 Guest 2251 Thumbs Up

Hi, I have the same problem.
This is an existing warehouse attached to the office building to retrofit. There are not party walls, there is just one wall dividing the office and warehouse with window in it so the engineers could verify the process from the office. In fact it is the same roof structure for both of them, since the office space is kind of embedded in the north facade of the warehouse. The warehouse roof just continues as part of the office space. The buildings have separate systems and services.

3
3
0
David Posada Sustainability Manager, GBD Architects Jun 07 2011 LEEDuser Expert 16345 Thumbs Up

Phoebe,
In some regions, there may be higher utility or government incentives for achieving NC instead of CI, but beyond those I can't think of any significant advantages in earning one rating vs. the other. You may find the soft costs a bit lower for CI than NC, especially for the EA credits, but you will need to account for furniture.

Xavi,
It sounds like the office may be "serving" the warehouse space since the windows are used to supervise the operations there, so it may not meet the intent of separate buildings that are horizontally attached. It is possible that reviewers would consider it a single building. You would need to 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 for clarification of the MPR to know for sure.

Post a Reply

Copyright 2014 – BuildingGreen, Inc.