Hi Anon and Pat,
Good discussion, what I do know though is there’s a quirk in the Australian regs and standard office building commissioning work flow. The regs state that for the building to get an occupancy certificate it must be fitted with floor finishes (I think), ceiling and lighting. The standard workflow is:
– Builder completes base building
– Occupancy certificate granted
– Builder gets paid
– Tenants start tenancy fitout (and subsequently tear out most of the ceiling, carpet and lighting.
So there’s legitimacy in the claim (due to the quirk), but as Pat says it has to affect both the GFA and the inventory.
There’s probably a business / sustainability opportunity there to come up with a removable fit-out that can be rolled out so a builder can get their occupancy certificate, but I digress.
My approach would be: Model reference without floor voids, but add these areas to GFA / NLA as fit.
Model Proposed design with the reduced materials but decreased GFA / NLA
My gut feeling is that it would be a marginal benefit (or even net impact when quoted as impacts per GFA or NLA. Green Star uses GFA as the functional unit so need to consider that.