Rating System

LEED BD+C: New Construction, LEED BD+C: New Construction, LEED BD+C: New Construction, LEED BD+C: New Construction, LEED BD+C: Schools, LEED BD+C: Schools, LEED BD+C: Core and Shell, LEED BD+C: Core and Shell

Rating System Version

v2 - LEED 2.0, v2 - LEED 2.2, v2 - LEED 2.2, v3 - LEED 2009, v2 - Schools 2007, v3 - LEED 2009, v2 - LEED 2.0, v3 - LEED 2009

Inquiry

Lot Area: 4,997,925 SF Lot Coverage: 72,560 SF In this particular situation, the local zoning requires that we maintain 95% open space. 95% increased by 25% (.95*1.25) = Open space requirement of 118.75%. This is impossible. If we were to perform the converse calculation and educe the maximum lot coverage amount by 25%, (75% of 5% = 3.75%.) On a lot of 4,997,925 sf, the maximum coverage allowed by zoning regulations would be 249,896 SF. 75% of 249,896 SF (allowable footprint) = 187,422 SF (or 3.75% of 4,997,925 SF (lot area) = 187,422 SF) 72,560 = 1.45% lot coverage of an area of 4,997,925 SF (or the open space is equal to 98.55% of the total lot area.) The very fact that the zoning requirements are so stringent, allowing only 5% development of the natural habitat, and by reducing the footprint further, by an excess of 25%, we maintain that this project accomplishes the intent of this credit (to conserve existing natural areas and restore damaged areas to provide habitat and promote biodiversity). The Fort Ticonderoga Association is dedicated to the preservation and protection of the native vegetation and wildlife in the Lake Champlain Valley. Furthermore, we maintain that at the other end of the spectrum, a lot with a smaller open space requirement, 1% for example, when increased by 25% results in a mere 1.25% requirement,. On a 1000 SF lot, this translates to a requirement shift from 10 SF to 12.5 SF, a nearly negligible difference. As the zoning requirements for open space increase, the credit becomes less possible to achieve. A 50% open space requirement increased by 25% results in 62.5% On a 1000 SF lot, the requirement increases from 500 SF by 125 SF to 625. At a requirement of 80% open space, the 25% increase results in a new requirement of 100%. (No building whatsoever.) Those sites with smaller requirements for open space to begin with are rewarded and those sites with the largest requirement for open space are penalized. Can our project achieve this credit by reducing the maximum allowable footprint by 25% as opposed to increasing the minimum required open space by 25%?