Our team has been deliberating for some time as to the definition of our project i.e. whether it is building reuse or new construction. We have concluded that it more closely fits the definition of a building reuse project. We ask that the committee render a decision on this matter soon so that we may proceed with our application. Please consider the following reasoning and background information: Approximate timeline of the project: 1880-1985 site used as a part of a large steelmill 1985-86 mill demolished 1986-August 99 site is vacant-sits unimproved from mill demolition Aug 99- Sept 2000 The Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh buys site and erects a 45,000 sf shell intended for use as a speculative lab building. At the late stages of shell construction, the University of Pittsburgh purchases building and site "as-is" and halts certain construction items so that they can plan for their user group. Those items included 1st floor slabs, painting and some exterior cladding. Sept 2000-present Construction ceases and building is left as a completed shell with a core of stairs, restrooms, elevators and mechanical/ electrical equipment serving the core. Spring 2000 A local charitable trust becomes involved, and encourages the project team to pursue a LEED Gold rating. June 2000 University of Pittsburgh hires IKM Architects to design the interiors for the tenant, a research lab known as McGowan Center. Nov. 2000 University of Pittsburgh registers the project for LEED. June 2000-Dec 2001 The new project team engages in an 18-month design effort, with LEED goals integrated from the beginning. Jan 2002 Construction begins July 2002 Anticipated substantial completion. While most LEED credits are not affected by "building reuse" vs "new construction" there are some that are. Specifically, we feel that the project qualifies for the three building re-use credits as well as the less stringent energy savings criteria. Additionally, while it is possible to document the materials and resources credits for the in-place shell construction, the data will not be nearly as accurate as the data for the build-out. That shell data is the property of the previous owner. The definition of our site conditions (what constitutes "pre-development") hinges upon this ruling as well. Consider the following closing comments:
No, this project cannot claim the building reuse credit for the structure as described. To qualify for the reuse credit there must be evidence of a substantial renovation. The building qualifies as a new building, as there has never been an occupant, and the structure was designed as a \'speculative lab building\' apparently to be purchased or leased as a new building. The fact that it was vacant for a period of time does not make it "reused."