We are renovating approximately 13,000 SF (with is about 50% of the first floor) of a 177,000 SF building. The renovation includes interior square footage as well as some major envelope work at the first floor. Based on this scope, I initially believed that either BD+C or ID+C would work, but that BD+C might be a better fit, given the envelope work. That said, I have been pouring through the V4 MPR's, and it seems like BD+C might not be viable at all based on the quotations below. Can you confirm that I am interpretting this correctly? Also, I feel like there are other criteria that I am missing. Where else should I be looking?
Quoted from the ID+C MPR
Building
- The LEED project should include the complete scope of work of the building or interior space.
- The LEED project can be delineated by ownership, management, lease, or party wall separation.
Interiors
- If a single entity owns, manages, or occupies an entire building and wishes to certify a renovated portion of the building that is not separated by ownership, management, lease, or party wall separation, they may do so if the project boundary includes 100% of the construction scope and is drawn at a clear, physical barrier.
Quoted from the BD+C MPR
Building
- The LEED project should include the entire building and complete scope of work. (Does this mean that I can no longer certify only a portion of the building under the BD+C system?)
Interiors
- The LEED project should be defined by a clear boundary such that the LEED project is physically distinct from other interior spaces within the building. (This statement appears to conflict with the paragraph above)
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11477 thumbs up
October 29, 2018 - 4:03 pm
Tracy, with exceptions for areas that are distinct (like a separate wing of a building) BD+C has always been a whole-building rating system. To apply it to the situation you're describing you would have to apply it to the whole building, including the non-renovated interior space.
Is there any distinction, as with ownership/management, between the 13,000 SF and the rest? If so, I would use ID+C here. If not, I think it's BD+C.
Michael Hill
2 thumbs up
July 11, 2019 - 5:13 pm
I have a similar question about a project I am working on. Renovations are being made to two floors in an existing 5 story admin building owned by a single entity.
The MPR for ID&C also says "If a single entity owns, manages, or occupies an entire building and wishes to certify a renovated portion of the building that is not separated by ownership, management, lease, or party wall separation, they may do so if the project boundary includes 100% of the construction scope and is drawn at a clear, physical barrier."
I find this to be quite confusing since I had thought that ID&C was geared towards spaces with different tenants/owners. Maybe it is a direct copy of the BD+C requirements left unaltered in error? It also brings up the question of what constitutes as "clear physical barrer".
I assume that unless the spaces are under different management/ownership that ID&C wouldn't apply and BD&C must be used. Is this correct? Common sense tells me that you shouldn't be able to certify a couple stories of a building but whoever writes those guides has made it as clear as mud.
If BD&C must be used then we must certify the entire building including meeting the energy/water reduction thresholds to meet the prerequisites, correct?
Tracy Marquis
Owner/ArchitectMarquis Architecture
6 thumbs up
July 12, 2019 - 9:37 am
In your scenario, it seems that you can really choose either system. The review team just wants to see a clear boundary to the certified space.
Good luck!
David Posada
Integrated Design & LEED SpecialistSERA Architects
LEEDuser Expert
1980 thumbs up
July 12, 2019 - 2:37 pm
Tracy - Which rating system did you end up using in your original question?
Michael - that's definitely ID&C language you highlighted. Even with one building owner, we need a clear physical barrier to distinguish certified from non-certified space.
I've seen a project similar to both of yours that even included an addition where USGC asked the project be switched from it's original BD&C NC registration to ID&C.
David Eldridge
Energy Efficiency NinjaGrumman/Butkus Associates
68 thumbs up
July 12, 2019 - 2:48 pm
BD+C applies to whole buildings or additions, maybe major wings of a building - not really intended for a subset of floors or single department of a larger building.
Interiors sounds like the right approach to the examples above. You might forgo credit due to some envelope upgrades taking place at the same time but an interior registration can fit floors or departments or other distinct projects in a building that are less than a whole building.