We are planning to construct 70.000 ft² warehouse distribution and associated office space about 7.000 ft² (warehouse is ten (10) times bigger than associated office space). So that each warehouse distribution and associated office space means 77.000 ft², to be rented in the future. So LEED CS has been selected. We have no idea about the future tenant.
This scheme will be replicated 10 times, inside a total boundary project, that means 770.000 ft².
My question: would it be possible to concentrate the effort pursuing LEED CS in office buildings and exclude warehouse distribution area? That means to certify the Office Space (LEED CS) and exclude the no- conditioned warehouse area.
My second question: Shall we go through Campus Approach or Group Approach?
Thanks in advance. BR David
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Michelle Rosenberger
PartnerArchEcology
522 thumbs up
July 4, 2016 - 7:18 pm
Hi David,
We do these projects all the time. No, you can't exclude the warehouse, but the requirements on unconditioned and not regularly occupied space are slight. Whether you go Campus or Group depends on whether you want one certification for the whole development, or you want each building to have its own certification. My clients typically want separate building certifications so that means Campus. Good luck.
David Lazaro
WSS REAL ESTATE6 thumbs up
July 5, 2016 - 8:39 am
Hello Michelle,
Thank you very much for your quick reply.
We are having some trouble calculating the cost for this certification.
As we don't know who the tenants will be, we would prefer to have one single certificate for the whole complex. This would mean a Group approach.
However, calculating the cost for both options, the campus approach is approximately half the price of the group approach. Does that sound normal?
Our calculations as per the fees set in the US GBC website are:
Campus approach: Master site registration+each project registration+master site precert.+each project precert.+master site review+each project review = 900+900*10+1500+0.2*0.045*sf each project (10)+1500+0.2*0.045*sf each project (10)
Group approach: Registration per building+certification per building = 900*10+0.045+sf each project (10)
In addition, does the group approach have precertification and review sepparate fees or are they combined?
Thank you very much for your help. BR. David
Michelle Rosenberger
PartnerArchEcology
522 thumbs up
July 5, 2016 - 12:18 pm
Hi David,
The fees should be similar. Precertification is not required. It's just an option for a Core & Shell that wants to market itself before the certification is received. The Master Site is optional based on how you register. A Group project can be under a Master Site or not. Usually this would represent a combination of Group, Campus and non-certifying projects that share a site that you would like to address at the larger scale.
From what you've conveyed, you are likely to just be a Group without the Master Site or the Precert fees. Check the AGMBC multiple building guidance for all the particulars on this. When you aggregate, site wide credits are awarded based on the performance of the project as a whole. Individual credits, like energy models, are typically awarded to the Group based on the lowest performing building.
David Lazaro
WSS REAL ESTATE6 thumbs up
July 6, 2016 - 8:19 am
Hello Michelle,
Thank you for your help. However it isn't still clear
Precertification is a requirement of our client. Therefore compulsory for us and we must take it into account when deciding on the approach.
We have an industrial development with 10 buildings. Each building has a warehouse and some office spaces. All 10 will be certified to LEED C+S. Our options are to certify it as a Campus project or a Group project.
With a Campus project, we would receive 10 LEED precertificates and 10 LEED certiticates. this doesn't make much sense both work-wise and marketing-wise. We would prefer to have a Group LEED certification, because we would get 1 certificate for the whole complex. Regardless of how many buildings each future tenant decides to occupy.
However, Group Certification seems to be far more expensive, with the $900 per building + certification per building. This doesn't make much sense to us.
Could you provide some guidance?
Thank you very much!
Michelle Rosenberger
PartnerArchEcology
522 thumbs up
July 8, 2016 - 11:24 am
Hi David,
Interesting. I have to admit that I'm having a little trouble following your reasoning. The issue it seems to me is either what the client wants or which approach is more cost effective but in your case apparently not both.
I believe you are correct that the Master Site is more cost effective. We have only pre-certified once, and I did not perceive any value to that process. You can market as pursuing LEED regardless of the precert so for us it just inflates the cost. And you do not get the benefit of the 20% discount on each building that the Campus scenario provides. Our clients don't perceive one certification of the whole group as being preferable to each building having it's own plaque. You still get synergies when you have similar buildings on the workflow side no matter which way you go. We have never elected to take the Group approach for these reasons.
As to the rationale from the USGBC side as to why Group does not discount the certifications like the Campus approach, I have no idea.