One building, two certificates?

Anthea. A lot of questions but the basic facts are this: Under MPR rules two buildings must be able to be 'separated' in very distinct guidelines. I ask you to review fully the requirements for vertically attached buildings and horizontally attached buildings in the MPR. Leaving aside the parking/landscaping/bike storage for the moment, if the two buildings cannot be 'separated' into two distinct portions it is very unlikely that you can provide for the two separate performance periods within the two buildings. Here's an alternative suggestion. Once the 'building' is certified as a single building purchase several of the translucent logos (They are an exact picture of the plaque) and mount these on every entrance door to the building. We have done this on several buildings that have multiple entrances, The logo looks like it has been sandblasted into the glass, and as they are on all entrances everyone entering the building has the knowledge that the whole building is certified.

Anthea,
Pg 22 of the MPR Supplement (2011 revision) has a provision for "Multi-party ownership:
a) Multiple-party ownership of a certifying building or space is acceptable. Proper accountability for MPR and rating system conformance must be in place."

What is unclear (of course) is what "proper accountability" means. You may want to approach GBCI directly and get guidance on how to input the Owner information. e.g., whose initials go on the LEED Online forms?

Good luck, and please post any more information you may get on this question.

If the MPR guidelines are not clear enough for your particular project, I would suggested submitting a CIR. When you submit, make sure to include plans that clearly show where the dividing lines between the projects are and how MEP systems are separated.

The project also seems like a good candidate for the Campus Approach, with one Master Site and two individual building certifications (if the building is allowed to be separated into two projects).

Anthea, OK, with this extra information we can now start to dig in with details. To separate the buildings vertically you will really need to show them separate...that's separate ownership (and really helps to have separate operational companies running the two parts). They must have separate metering, energy, gas and water. They must have separate HVAC systems....and if at all possible separate or clearly defined, entrances to the two parts. However they can share, fire systems, fire escapes and common roof (which of course they have). In terms of landscaping we find it better to assign all the landscaping to one part and the submetering is better able to handle the difference. This of course will mean that one building will gain different credits from another. As far as CMB, the cost benefit of using the system is not worth it...stick with separate certifications.

Hello,
I have a similar situation as Anthea, where in a single site I have a shopping mall, with a hotel building and separately an office building, both on top of the mall. They all share an entrance and below both the hotel and office buildings is the mall. This site forms part of a Master site where other buildings will be separately certified, but how to define a LEED boundary for each seems unclear. Can a single site have 3 separate certifications? Anthea, have you been able to figure your project out? Thanks!

Rosamaria, This is getting complicated. No a single site cannot have 3 certifications (unless they were EB, NC and CI, which is not what you are asking)...unless you are able to clearly define the operations of the three spaces as I mentioned to Anthea above. In your case I can see that the hotel would have a separate operating company (Hilton for example) who would not be operating the mall and the office. But the mall and office block may well have the a common operating team (CBRE, Cush for examples). The swing gate here if having as few shared services as possible. Contact GBCI direct for clarification.