Hi,

Can anyone please confirm if form release compounds need to meet both VOC limits and emissions requirements? If so, does anyone know of any compliant product?

Hi Fellow Users,

I'm looking for some help.

Our new construction is being built on existing parking, therefore there is removal of some carp parking spaces. No additional parking is being added to the project. 

Would this qualify as EP?

Thanks

The LEEDv4 Reference Guide stipulates "when additional properties owned by the same entity responsible for the LEED project are contiguous to the project site and have the same or higher lighting zone as the project, the lighting boundary MAY BE expanded to include those properties." (page 215)

Does this mean that it is left to the choice of the team and that the contiguous building can be EXCLUDED? 

Our project is an addition to an existing building, and only this addition is pursuing LEEDv4-CS certification.  There is no lighting master plan that is developed or anticipated for the site. Can we apply this credit only to the LEED project, and up to certain parts of the property line?  How do we determine what parts of the property we can exclude?

I have 2 issues with this prerequisite:

1) I understand that the policy should comply with some credit requirements, incuding MRc7 "Solid waste Management - Ongoing consummables", that requires to "Maintain a waste reduction and recycling program that addresses (...) food waste". Following a discussion with the LEED Reviewer, I undestand that the prequisite does not imply an actual performance, not even actual food waste management program. So if we there is no food waste management program, what should we write in the policy to be compliant with LEED?

2) For our project, we have two vertically attached buildings. Only one is pursuing LEED. But waste from the 2 buildings are disposed in the same place / compactors. The policy requires to implement a performance evaluation process. As alll waste from the 2 buildings are disposed in the same place, it's little bit complicated.. An annual waste characterisation could be a solution but we would like to avoid theses charges if it is not strictly required. What would be acceptable in this case for the evaluation process?

I know that implementation of the policy does not need to be demonstrated but we prefer to avoid writing things that will not be implemented..

Thanks for your help

Let's talk about watersense and local equivalents. 

What makes a local standard equivalent? If we can meet or beat the flow rates, is there another requirement or feature that we need to meet to be deemed equivalent?

We have a certified LEED-NCv4 project located on a site pursuing a LEED-ND certification. Since several buildings, including the LEED-NC project will be built at the same time, we would like to be able to merge each of them by using the « Group approach » for the construction waste management calculation.

As mentioned in the Reference Guide for Building Design and Construction: « All buildings in the group may be documented as one. Multiple buildings on a campus may share waste hauling contracts and on-site collection equipment. Data aggregation is allowed, provided that each building included is pursuing the same option.  

By same option, does it mean that all buildings compiled in the calculation must pursue LEED certification or is it the compliance option chosen for achieving the credit ?

Why can't we use the campus approach in this credit ?

Thank you, 

I’m currently reviewing a HPD v2.1 for LEED v4 Building Product Disclosure and Optimization – Material Ingredient Option 1.

Just about everything on this particular HPD meets the requirements listed on the “Graphic presentation of guidance of Basic Inventory for using HPD 2.1 to meet LEED requirements” document provided on the HPD website (https://www.hpd-collaborative.org/leed-v4-credit-achievement/). The only section I am unsure about is the requirement for the “[s]tatement about Special Conditions when "No" is indicated for Characterized, Screened, or Identified." The HPD under review has selected “No” for the “Identified – Name and Identifier Provided?” section, and noted "Substances representing 99.5% of the product weight meet the 1000 ppm threshold and are screened" in the "Inventory and Screening Notes" section. 

Is the note sufficient as the “[s]tatement about Special Conditions when "No" is indicated for Characterized, Screened, or Identified"? I’ve reviewed the relevant sections in the HPD 2.1 Open Standard, but I am still unclear.

The HPD i am reviewing can be accessed here:

https://hpdrepository.hpd-collaborative.org/Pages/Results.aspx#k=dulux

Product name: Dulux Lifemaster Acrylic Latex (59311, 59317, 59425)

Manufacturer: PPG Architectural Finishes

Hi Fellow LEED Users,

Looking for a bit of advice in regard to bike racks. I'm working on a new school construction, Is it possible to use the an overhang of a building as the shelter for the bike racks could or do we absolutely need a freestanding space? 

Thank you

Hello,

Our project was built on a former sports field. I was wondering if a sports  field (baseball) is considered graded or prime farmland for credit SSc1? For credit SSc5.2, a sports field is exempt as natural environment therefore I would think that it would not be considered graded or prime farmland for SSc1. 

Does anyone have experience with this issue? I haven't found a CIR or query on LEED User to shed some light on this.

Thank you,

Sophie

Hi Ladies & Gentlemen,

I'm new to LEED and VERY new to submission...I will be completing my first submission soon.

Its there any guide/cheat books that anyone can suggest for a newbie??