I had posted about this project on another thread when we thought it was just about parking capacity but after conversations with USGBC, it has turned into a LEED boundary exercise. We submitted the following verbiage to USGBC explaining the potential division between the 2 towers that are on our site (which are connected at the ground floor):
"The team has currently drawn the LEED boundary to exclude the housing portion of the project because the phasing of the project has the housing being constructed after the commercial core and shell space, the housing is potentially part of a separate construction contract and separate set of documents, and is part of a different Owner's Group. All the property within the proposed LEED boundary is under one ownership."
We received a response that acknowledged this division is acceptable as long as we meet the other requirements listed in the MPR guidelines:
"The LEED project boundary may be defined in a three-dimensional manner, such that contiguous spaces that project under or over portions of non-certified projects may be included. The approach described in the inquiry which combines the underground parking, commercial core and shell spaces located above the parking, and the additional retail core and shell spaces located below, and adjacent to, the future residential development, into a single LEED project is acceptable provided the areas are contiguous, have separate systems as noted above, and can be delineated (by signage and naming) from non-certified portions of the development."
Since we received this ruling, there has been a discussion in how the property Ownership might change - one Owner with a long term lease for the portion of the project not being certified, meaning that the 2 parts of the project would be managed by 2 entities. The project would still remain under 2 construction contracts as we mentioned in our clarification request.
Does anyone have any experience with long term leases with separate management companies versus 2 completly different Owners?