LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
LEED Canada‐CI 1.0 Certification Review Report
The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Canada Rating Systems are promoted by the Canada Purpose Green Building Council to encourage and facilitate the development of more sustainable buildings. This project was evaluated according to LEED Canada‐CI (for Commercial Interiors) system as per below.
The report is organized into five environmental categories as defined by LEED including: Sustainable Sites, Water Environmental Categories Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources and Indoor Environmental Quality. The category of Innovation and Design Process is also included.
LEED Prerequisites
Prerequisites must be achieved. These prerequisites should be addressed immediately by the team, as they are mandatory.
The environmental categories are subdivided into the established LEED credits, which are based on desired LEED Credits performance goals within each category. An assessment of whether the credit is anticipated to be achieved, achieved, pending, or denied is made and a narrative describes the basis for the assessment.
Explanation of Scoring
Achieved
37
The applicant has provided the mandatory documentation (completed Letter Template and associated information) that supports achievement of the credit requirements and associated points. Credits in this category are designated as 'CAA' for credit achievement anticipated. These points may be selected for a second audit if the applicant fails to successfully demonstrate achievement for one or more Preliminary LEED Review audited credits.
Pending
0
The applicant has not totally satisfied the mandatory documentation, or the documentation is incomplete and point assessment cannot yet be made Audited points are also counted in this category and are designated by the word
assessment cannot yet be made. Audited points are also counted in this category and are designated by the word 'Audited' under the point score.
Denied
0
The applicant has applied for a point in a particular credit, but has misinterpreted the credit intent or cannot substantiate meeting the requirements. The project has not demonstrated achievement of these credits.
Rating
Final Review Rating is Gold
Official LEED Scores: Certified: 21‐26 Silver: 27‐31 Gold: 32‐41 Platinum: 42‐57
Important Note
Certification Reviews are not to be considered precedents for future projects wishing to achieve LEED Canada certification. Only Credit Interpretation Requests can be considered precedents.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
1
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
14932
Professional Engineers Ontario Stage 2
Final Review
July 5, 2012
March 22, 2013
December 20, 2013
Project Number
Project Name
Review Status
First Review Date
Second Review Date
Final Review Date
Gold
Review Level Achieved
Status of Prerequisites
Achieved
EAp1 ‐ Fundamental Commissioning
Achieved
EAp2 ‐ Minimum Energy Performance
Achieved
EAp3 ‐ CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment
Achieved
MRp1 ‐ Storage & Collection of Recyclables
Achieved
EQp1 ‐ Minimum IAQ Performance
Achieved
EQp2 ‐ Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control
Total
Denied
Pending
Achieved
Status of Category Points
Certified 21‐26 points Silver 27‐31 points Gold 32‐41 points Platinum 42‐57 points
4
0
04
Sustainable Sites (7)
2
0
02
Water Efficiency (2)
8
0
08
Energy & Atmosphere (12)
8
0
08
Materials & Resources (14)
10
0
0 10
Indoor Environmental Quality (17)
5
0
05
Innovation & Design (5)
i &
i ( )
37
0
0
37
Project Totals
General Review Comment (a comment will only be provided if determined necessary)
1st REVIEW
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
2
2013‐12‐20
Denied
Pending
Achieved
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
4.0 0.0 0.0
0
0
Sustainable Sites 0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
7 Points
Select a LEED Certified Building
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
OR Options A ‐ L (Maximum 3 Points)
Option A. Brownfield Redevelopment
1st REVIEW Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option B. Stormwater Management, Rate and Quantity
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option C. Stormwater Management, Treatment
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.5 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
CAA
1st REVIEW
Option D. Heat Island Reduction, Non‐Roof
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that a minimum of 50% of parking spaces have been placed underground or are covered by structured parking.
As per the LEED Canada‐CI Reference Guide, a site plan must be provided demonstrating areas of paving, landscaping, and building footprint to support the declaration. However, the site plan provided for project 13210 shows credit requirements have been satisfied. On future
plan provided for project 13210 shows credit requirements have been satisfied. On future projects, please provide all required information on a single marked‐up site plan, as per the LEED Canada‐CI Reference Guide under Submittals.
Credit achievement anticipated for 0.5 credit.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated for 0.5 credit.
Credit achieved for 0.5 credit.
Option E. Heat Island Reduction, Roof
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
3
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
0.5 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
CAA
Option F. Light Pollution Reduction
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the building's exterior lighting has been designed according to IESNA recommended practice manual.
Credit achievement anticipated for 0.5 credit.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated for 0.5 credit.
Credit achieved for 0.5 credit.
Option G. Water Efficient Irrigation, Reduced Potable Water Consumption
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option H. Water Efficient Irrigation, No Potable Water Use or No Irrigation
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option I. Innovative Wastewater Technologies
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option J. Water Use Reduction, 20% or 30% Reduction
The applicant has provided the signed LEED letter template declaring the building uses 31.82% less water than baseline fixture performance requirements and has an ongoing plan to require future occupants to comply. The applicant also provided a copy of their plumbing fixture policy.
Water use calculations show male occupants using low flow half flush water closets twice a day; however, mechanical drawings indicate that men’s washrooms are equipped with urinals. Please update water use calculations using the appropriate fixtures in the design case.
Credit achievement pending for 1 point.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has provided a revised signed LEED letter template declaring that the building uses 46.44% less water than baseline fixture performance requirements. The applicant has also provided the urinal shop drawing.
Credit achievement anticipated for 1 point.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved for 1 point.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
4
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
0
0
0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option K. Onsite Renewable Energy
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Option L. Other Quantifiable Environmental Performance
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 2
1st REVIEW
Development Density and Community Connectivity
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project is located within 800m of a residential zone or neighbourhood with an average density of 25 units per hectare, and has pedestrian access to 10 basic services within 800 m. The applicant has also provided an area plan to highlight the building location, the residential zone, and 10 amenities within 800m of the project space.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
5
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 3.1
1st REVIEW
Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project building is located within 800 m of two subway lines, as well as within 400 m of three bus lines with frequent service. The applicant has also provided an area map highlighting the building location, bus stop and subway terminal locations, distances between the building and transit stops, and a scale bar for reference.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 3.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Alternative Transportation, Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 3.3
1st REVIEW
Alternative Transportation, Parking Availability
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
6
2013‐12‐20
Achieved
Pending
Denied
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
2
0
0
1
0
CAA
Water Efficiency
0 Credit 1.1
1st REVIEW
2 Points
Water Use Reduction, 20% Reduction
The applicant has provided the signed LEED letter template declaring the project anticipates a 31.82% reduction in tenant potable water use compared to the baseline case.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 1.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Water Use Reduction, 30% Reduction
As per WEc1.1.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
7
2013‐12‐20
Achieved
Pending
Denied
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
8
0
0
Achieved
Energy & Atmosphere
Prereq 1
1st REVIEW
12 Points
Fundamental Commissioning
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that all fundamental commissioning activities have been completed. The applicant has also provided mechanical and electrical narratives, mechanical and electrical drawings and lighting specifications.
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Achieved
Prereq 2
1st REVIEW
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
Prerequisite achieved.
Minimum Energy Performance
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the tenant space complies with ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1‐2004. The applicant has also provided mechanical and electrical narratives and lighting schedule.
Please provide a schedule of HVAC equipment installed within the tenants’ scope of work, identifying equipment and its capacities, efficiencies and controls; and the corresponding ASHRAE Standard 90.1 or code‐mandated requirements.
Prerequisite achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a schedule of HVAC equipment installed within the tenants’ scope of work, identifying equipment and its capacities, efficiencies and controls; and corresponding ASHRAE Standard 90.1 or code‐mandated requirements.
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Achieved
Prereq 3
1st REVIEW
Prerequisite achieved.
CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that there are no CFCs in HVAC&R systems that have been installed or renovated within the project's scope of work.
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
Prerequisite achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
8
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
3
0
CAA
0 Credit 1.1
1st REVIEW
Optimize Energy Performance, Lighting Power
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project has achieved a 45.3% reduction in lighting power density below ASHRAE 90.1‐2004, using the space‐by‐space method. The applicant has also provided lighting equipment schedules and a lighting narrative.
The six entries for the eighth floor have identical gross floor areas listed on the letter template; this is unusual. Please confirm the correct floor area is entered. In addition, the following spaces appear to have been omitted from the lighting power calculations: suite 102, server 508, lounge 603, 812, ground and second floor corridors and washrooms on floor 3, 4 and 8.
Project photos appear to show that workstations are provided with task lighting. Ensure that task lighting is accounted for in the total connected lighting power.
This credit has been selected for audit. Please submit audit materials as per the LEED Canada‐
CI 1.0 Reference Guide. Credit achievement pending for 3 points.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
9
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a revised signed LEED letter template declaring that the project has achieved a 36.8% reduction in lighting power density below ASHRAE 90.1‐2004, using the building area method. The applicant has also submitted a general narrative, a narrative from the lighting designer, lighting power density calculations, ballast shop drawings, fixture shop drawings, LED task lighting cut sheet and reflected ceiling plans.
Please note that fixture cut sheets do not indicate that F28T5 fixtures are equipped with 25 W lamps. Please provide supporting documentation; otherwise, use an input power of 59 Watts as per submitted ballast shop drawings.
The input power for fixture CB (equipped with three 13 W lamps) is not indicated on the shop drawings. As per the ASHRAE 90.1‐2004 User’s manual Table 9‐H, a 13 W two pin CFL consumes approximately 17 W per lamp.
Fixture CD appears to be a single lamp F54T5HO fixture, which has a typical input power of 62 watts (as per the ASHRAE 90.1‐2004 User’s manual), but an input power of 94 W has been used. Please confirm fixture type and input power.
Please confirm input power for the fixtures above with supporting documentation; otherwise, use default input power from ASHRAE 90.1‐2004 User’s Manual tables 9‐E to H. FA fixtures on the ground floor (1/E302) do not appear to be on occupancy sensor control. Please confirm the existence of occupancy sensors.
Please address all the issues listed above and revise the LEED letter template, and resubmit compliance documentation as requested.
Credit achievement pending for 3 points.
FINAL REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a response narrative along with shop drawings and revised lighting power worksheets. The applicant has also provided a revised signed LEED letter template declaring that the project has achieved a 37.0% reduction in lighting power density below ASHRAE 90.1‐2004, using the building area method.
Credit achieved for 3 points.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
10
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 1.2
1st REVIEW
Optimize Energy Performance, Lighting Controls
The applicant has submitted the LEED letter template declaring that daylight‐responsive controls have been installed. The applicant has also submitted a narrative describing the lighting controls incorporated into the tenant fit up as well as a lighting schedule.
Where daylighting controls are provided, it appears they control the first perimeter row of lighting only. However, the credit requires that daylight responsive controls are installed in all regularly occupied spaces within 4.5 meters of windows and skylights. In many cases, the second row of lighting is within 4.5 meters of the perimeter.
In addition, several perimeter spaces do not appear to be equipped with daylighting controls, including rooms 104, 504, 505, 632, 345, 646, and 702‐707.
Please clarify how the project meets the credit requirements with respect to the areas noted above. This credit has been selected for audit. Please submit audit materials as per the LEED Canada‐
CI 1.0 Reference Guide.
Credit achievement pending. 2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a revised signed LEED letter template along with a general narrative explaining that additional daylight harvesting sensors have been added to additional zones. The applicant has also provided narrative from the lighting designer; lighting control plans; schedule of lighting controls; lighting compliance documentation (under EAc1.1); and lighting controls and fixture shop drawings.
The narrative states that daylighting controls have only been provided on the perimeter row of lighting fixtures as daylight penetration is limited by glazing type and that controls on the d
f li hti
d
dt b i
ti l A
h th
j t
t th i t t f
second row of lighting was deemed to be impractical. As such, the project meets the intent of this credit.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
11
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 1.3
1st REVIEW
Optimize Energy Performance, HVAC
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the installed HVAC systems comply with applicable sections of the E‐benchmark prescriptive criteria for mechanical equipment efficiency requirements (Option A). The applicant has also submitted an HVAC narrative.
Credit achievement anticipated for 1 point.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
2
0
CAA
0 Credit 1.4
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated for 1 point.
Credit achieved for 1 point.
Optimize Energy Performance, Equipment & Appliances
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that 96.18% of eligible equipment is Energy Star® rated. The applicant has also provided a listing of all equipment and a narrative describing the equipment and appliances that will be installed in the project scope of work. Credit achievement anticipated for 2 points.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 2
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated for 2 points.
Credit achieved for 2 points.
Enhanced Commissioning
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that all enhanced commissioning activities have been completed.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 3
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Energy Use, Measurement & Payment Accountability
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 4
1st REVIEW
Green Power
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
12
2013‐12‐20
Achieved
Pending
Denied
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
8
0
0
Achieved
Materials & Resources
Prereq 1
1st REVIEW
14 Points
Storage & Collection of Recyclables
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that all five mandatory recyclables will be collected and stored. The applicant has also provided a ground floor plan showing the location of the dedicated recycling storage area and the path to the loading dock. In addition, the applicant provided marked‐up plans of each applicable floor showing the locations of recycling collection bins within the tenant spaces, along with a letter from the landlord outlining the building's recycling program.
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 1.1
1st REVIEW
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
Prerequisite achieved.
Tenant Space, Long‐Term Commitment
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project occupant owns its space.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 1.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Building Reuse, Maintain 40% of Interior Non‐Structural Components
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 1.3
1st REVIEW
Building Reuse, Maintain 60% of Interior Non‐Structural Components
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
13
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 2.1
1st REVIEW
Construction Waste Management: Divert 50% from Landfill
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that 79.17% of construction waste was diverted from landfill.
This credit has been selected for audit. Please submit audit materials as per the LEED Canada‐
CI Reference Guide.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a brief response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with the requested audit materials, consisting of a copy of the project's Construction Waste Management Plan, a waste tracking spreadsheet, a letter from the waste removal/distribution company that includes a list of all waste receiving facilities, copies of project demolition plans, and copies of applicable waybills from the appropriate waste receiving facilities. Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 2.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achieved.
Construction Waste Management: Divert 75% from Landfill
As per MRc2.1.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
As per MRc2.1.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
As per MRc2.1.
Credit achieved.
0
0
0 Credit 3.1
1st REVIEW
Resource Reuse, 5%
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 3.2
1st REVIEW
Resource Reuse, 10%
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
14
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 3.3
1st REVIEW
Resource Reuse, 30% Furniture and Furnishings
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project used salvaged, refurbished, or used furniture and furnishings for 51.72% of the total furniture and furnishings budget. The applicant has also provided a spreadsheet listing the reused pieces of furniture and furnishings with their replacement value.
As per the LEED Canada‐CI Reference Guide under Submittals, please provide documentation for the value of the balance of new furniture and furnishings.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a brief response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative) and a table listing the quantity and dollar value of new furniture and furnishings purchased for this project. The total value of the items listed is $658,103.97, whereas the LEED letter template indicates that $546,290 of new furniture and furnishings were purchased. However, this error does not affect credit achievement; correcting the total value of furniture and furnishings in the calculation, results in 43% salvaged, refurbished, or used furniture and furnishings. On future projects, please ensure that the correct value is included in the calculation.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
15
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.1
1st REVIEW
Recycled Content, 10% (post‐consumer + ½ pre‐consumer)
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that 22.2% of construction materials contain recycled content (post‐consumer plus 0.5 pre‐consumer, in aggregate). This credit has been selected for audit. Please submit audit materials as per the LEED Canada‐
CI Reference Guide.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a brief response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with the requested audit materials, consisting of supporting documentation verifying the stated recycle content for each product listed in the LEED letter template.
A couple of minor discrepancies were noted between the submitted supporting documents and values entered in the LEED letter template, but these errors were not significant enough to impact credit achievement. However, for future projects, please ensure that the values in the LEED letter template correspond with the supporting documentation.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achieved.
Recycled Content, 20% (post‐consumer + ½ pre‐consumer)
As per MRc4.1.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
As per MRc4.1.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
As per MRc4.1.
Credit achieved.
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 5.1
1st REVIEW
Regional Materials, 20% Manufactured Regionally
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that 32.0% of construction materials are regionally manufactured.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
16
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
0
0
0 Credit 5.2
1st REVIEW
Regional Materials, 10% Extracted and Manufactured Regionally
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 6
1st REVIEW
Rapidly Renewable Materials
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 7
1st REVIEW
Certified Wood
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that 100% of wood‐
based products and materials are certified in accordance with the FSC principles and criteria. The applicant has also listed the FSC‐certified materials and products used, their costs and FSC chain‐of‐custody certificate numbers.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
17
2013‐12‐20
Achieved
Pending
Denied
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
10
0
0
Achieved
Indoor Environmental Quality
Prereq 1
1st REVIEW
17 Points
Minimum IAQ Performance
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project is fully compliant with sections 4, 5, 6 and 7 of ASHRAE 62.1‐2004. The applicant has also submitted a brief narrative describing the ventilation strategy along with ASHRAE multi‐zone calculations.
Multi‐zone calculations appear to have been performed with the percent of total design airflow rate at condition analyzed, Ds, at 100% for all zones. For the critical zone(s), Ds will typically be determined based on the zone minimum airflow rate setpoint, although it may be higher to reflect the lowest zone load that can be expected when the space is fully occupied. Noncritical zones may have a Ds of 1 or slightly less to reflect load diversity. In addition, calculations should be provided for both cooling and heating modes. Please clarify and submit revised calculations as necessary.
This prerequisite has been selected for audit. Please submit audit materials as per the LEED Canada‐CI 1.0 Reference Guide. Prerequisite achievement pending.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
18
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a general narrative, narrative from the mechanical designer, multi‐
zone outdoor air calculations using the ASHRAE 62.1 calculator and output from Carrier HAP. The submitted documentation does not demonstrate compliance with ASHRAE 62.1.
Calculations have been performed with the percent of total design airflow rate (Ds) at 100% for all zones, as noted in the first review. The narrative states that, as a whole, each floor receives the correct total volume of outside air and that the outdoor air intake is adjusted to maintain a constant supply of outdoor air as the system flow rate modulates. However, this does not prevent the possibility of local under ventilation of critical zones. In addition, please provide calculations for both heating and cooling mode. Note that zones with air side reheat may have a zone air distribution (Ez) of 0.8. Please provide justification for Ez for zones with reheat with respect to Table 6‐2 of ASHRAE 62.1‐2004. Note that the requirements of this prerequisite must be met in the worst case design condition, which is likely to be in heating season for systems with overhead heating.
Please revise calculations as per first review comments. Should the required outdoor air intake increase from the first submittal, provide confirmation from the party responsible for this prerequisite that the system has the required capacity to meet the outdoor air load and that the system has been rebalanced accordingly.
Alternatively, if the building cannot meet the ASHRAE 62.1‐2004 minimum outside air requirements, provide a letter from a professional engineer outlining the space and system constraints that preclude compliance with the Standard’s minimum outdoor air supplies; and indicating the maximum outdoor air supplies that can be provided with these constraints. Provide photographs/specs or manufacturer’s literature of installed mechanical equipment, as‐
built mechanical plans; or as‐built single line drawings highlighting space‐constrained aspects in the system (e.g., vertical riser/horizontal chase space). Note that the requirement in this case is to demonstrate that the absolute minimum of 4.7L/s per person has been met for the project.
Prerequisite achievement pending.
FINAL REVIEW
The applicant has provided a narrative describing outdoor air calculation procedure, along with multiple zone analysis using the ASHRAE 62.1 MZ tool.
Prerequisite achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
19
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
Achieved
Prereq 2
1st REVIEW
Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the building is a smoke‐free facility, and that designated smoking areas are located at least 7.6 m away from entries, outdoor air intakes and operable windows.
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 1
1st REVIEW
Prerequisite achievement anticipated.
Prerequisite achieved.
Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 2
1st REVIEW
Increased Ventilation
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
20
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 3.1
1st REVIEW
Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that a Construction IAQ Management Plan has been developed and implemented for the construction and pre‐
occupancy phases of the building, and listing air filtration media installed during and at the end of construction. The applicant has also provided a design narrative detailing how each of the five SMACNA approaches were implemented during construction.
It was noted that the applicant checked the incorrect boxes on the LEED letter template, indicating that 18 construction photographs would be submitted in lieu of a narrative. On future projects, please ensure that the LEED letter template corresponds with the documentation approach followed.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 3.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
21
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.1
1st REVIEW
Low‐Emitting Materials, Adhesives and Sealants
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template listing all adhesive and sealant materials used on the project, along with the applicable VOC limit and actual VOC content of each.
It was noted that under the "SCAQMD / GS Category" column, the applicant indicated "SCAQMD Rule 1168" rather than the specific SCAQMD category ("Carpet Adhesive", "Duct Sealant", etc.). Please revise and resubmit the LEED letter template with the applicable category of each product identified.
This credit has been selected for audit. Please submit audit materials as per the LEED Canada‐
CI Reference Guide.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a brief response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with a revised signed LEED letter template with the specific SCAQMD category listed for each product in the "SCAQMD / GS Category" column. In addition, the applicant has provided the requested audit materials, consisting of back‐up documentation verifying the listed VOC content for each product.
The applicant has indicated that several products have been classified as "Sealants‐Other" under SCAQMD Rule 1168, including thread sealants, firestopping products, and Master's Pro‐
Dope that was incorrectly classified as a Duct Sealant. Please note that the use of the "Sealants‐Other" category has been approved for duct sealants only, as clarified in CIR 518. Where the application of adhesives, sealants or adhesive or sealant primers are not specifically listed in the tables of SCAQMD Rule 1168 they must be classified as "Architectural" rather than "Other". The SCAQMD Rule 1168 (October 2003 and January 2005 versions) defines architectural application as the "use of an adhesive, sealant, or adhesive or sealant primer on stationary structures, including mobile homes, and their appurtenances." However, as clarified in CIR 960, in recognition that there have been instances of misinterpreting the architectural application definition of SCAQMD Rule 1168 in the building construction sector, projects with a building permit date prior to the issuance of this CIR (01/22/2013) are allowed to classify unlisted sealants and sealant primers as "Sealants ‐ Other" or "Sealant Primers ‐ Other" respectively. Please take note for future projects.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
22
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.2
1st REVIEW
Low‐Emitting Materials, Paints and Coatings
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template listing all paint and coating materials used on the project, along with the applicable VOC limit and actual VOC content of each.
It was noted that under the "Green Seal / SCAQMD Category" column, the applicant indicated the name of the applicable standard rather than the specific category ("Flat Paint", "Primers, Sealers, and Under Coats", etc.). Please revise and resubmit the LEED letter template with the applicable category of each product identified.
Credit achievement pending. 2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a brief response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with a revised signed LEED letter template with the specific Green Seal or SCAQMD category listed for each product in the "Green Seal / SCAQMD Category" column.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.3
1st REVIEW
Credit achieved.
Low‐Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template listing the carpet products used on the project and declaring their compliance with the CRI Green Label Program. Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
23
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.4
1st REVIEW
Low‐Emitting Materials, Composite Wood and Laminate Adhesives
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template listing the composite wood, agrifibre products and all laminating adhesives used on the project, and confirming that they contain no added urea‐formaldehyde. The applicant has also provided back‐up documentation for each product. The MSDS submitted for the Roseburg Plywood does not explicitly state that the product contains no added urea‐formaldehyde; it does declare the presence of phenol‐formaldehyde, but does not make any statement regarding urea‐formaldehyde. In addition, the documentation for "Foundations & Uxbridge" confirms Greenguard compliance, but does not make a statement regarding the presence of urea‐formaldehyde. Please provide additional documentation for these two products verifying that they contain no added urea‐
formaldehyde, as required in the LEED Canada‐CI Reference Guide under Submittals.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with revised or resubmitted back‐up documentation for the Roseburg Plywood and "Foundations & Uxbridge" products, verifying that these products contain no added urea‐
formaldehyde.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
24
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 4.5
1st REVIEW
Low‐Emitting Materials, Systems Furniture and Seating
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that all systems furniture and seating products satisfy the credit requirements of Option A: Greenguard Indoor Air Quality Certified. The applicant has also provided a list of products indicating the manufacturer and product line, item description, and period of manufacture. In addition, the applicant has provided a copy of the Greenguard certificate for each listed product.
It was noted that the period of manufacture listed on the template for each product was the same as the certification period listed on the associated Greenguard certificate. Please confirm that the actual manufacturing dates of the products were included, demonstrating that the Greenguard certification period began before and extends through the manufacturing dates, as required in the LEED Canada‐CI Reference Guide under Submittals.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with a revised signed LEED letter template with the actual period of manufacture listed for each product.
The SCS certificate for the Steelcase "Answer Cabinets" showed a certification period of December 2011 to September 2012, which falls outside of the period of manufacture, which is claimed to have been October 2010 to April 2011. Please provide documentation to verify that the Steelcase product was certified during the period of manufacture.
Credit achievement pending.
FINAL REVIEW
The applicant provided screen capture from the SCS Certified Products Database showing that the Steelcase Answer furniture line has been certified since November 10, 2006 through present day.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
25
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
0
0
0 Credit 5
1st REVIEW
Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 6.1
1st REVIEW
Controllability of Systems, Lighting
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that lighting controls have been provided for a minimum of 90% of occupants, and that lighting controls have been installed in all shared multi‐occupant spaces.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 6.2
1st REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Controllability of Systems, Temperature and Ventilation
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
26
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 7.1
1st REVIEW
Thermal Comfort, Compliance The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that the project space complies with ASHRAE 55‐2004. The applicant has also submitted section 6.1.1‐ Documentation along with two memorandum outlining basis of HVAC design, HVAC zoning diagrams, a commissioning report addressing a cold complaint on the 5th floor, and HVAC control sequences.
Please clarify the humidity control strategy, as it is not clear from the submitted documentation.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a general narrative and a narrative from the mechanical designer, clarifying the humidification strategy.
Note that there is no lower level humidity requirement in ASHRAE 55. Please clarify how upper humidity levels are managed to meet ASHRAE 55 comfort conditions.
Credit achievement pending.
FINAL REVIEW
The applicant has provided a narrative describing dehumidification strategy as well as ASHRAE 55 comfort analysis. The applicant has also provided comfort calculations for various conditions.
Credit achieved.
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 7.2
1st REVIEW
Thermal Comfort, Monitoring
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that a permanent monitoring system and process for corrective action have been implemented. The applicant
monitoring system and process for corrective action have been implemented. The applicant has provided a narrative under EQc7.1.
Credit achievement pending EQc7.1.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement pending EQc7.1.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
27
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
0
0
0 Credit 8.1
1st REVIEW
Daylight and Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
0
0
0 Credit 8.2
1st REVIEW
Daylight and Views, Daylight 90% of Spaces
Credit Not Attempted
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 8.3
1st REVIEW
2nd REVIEW
Daylight and Views, Views for 90% of Seated Spaces
This credit was not attempted in the first submission.
The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that at least 90% of regularly‐occupied spaces have access to views. The applicant has also provided a narrative (an additional narrative is provided with the overall submission narrative), a summary calculation table verifying that 97.63% of regularly occupied spaces have access to views, marked‐up floor plans for each occupied floor, and a section drawing showing the line of sight for a typical seated occupant.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
The applicant has submitted an updated, signed LEED letter template declaring that at least 90% of regularly‐occupied spaces have access to views, along with a summary calculation table verifying that 97.63% of regularly occupied spaces have access to views, marked‐up floor plans for each occupied floor, and a section drawing showing the line of sight for a typical seated occupant.
There does not appear to be any substantial difference between the documents provided at this
stage and the documents provided during the 2nd Review stage
this stage and the documents provided during the 2nd Review stage.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
28
2013‐12‐20
Achieved
Pending
Denied
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
5
0
0
1
0
0 Credit 1.1
CAA
Innovation & Design Process
5 Points
Innovation in Design
Green Houskeeping Program
1st REVIEW The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template and a credit description for a Green Cleaning Policy. The applicant has also provided a copy the building's Green Cleaning Policy, MSDS of various approved cleaning products, cut sheets for purchased cleaning equipment, and standard operating procedure documents from the retained custodial contractor.
It was not clear from the submitted MSDS that the applicable products were certified under one or more of the standards listed in the Green Cleaning Policy. Please provide additional documentation to verify that these products meet the required performance‐level standards.
In addition, it was noted in the policy that the deodorizer and odour counteractant products currently used do not meet the sustainability criteria set out earlier in the policy. Please confirm what steps will be taken to correct this.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative) stating that the applicant and custodial contractor are working together to identify alternative deodorizer and odour counteractant products that meet the sustainability criteria, and will replace the non‐compliant products as soon as compliant products can be found. In addition, the applicant provided a product catalogue verifying that the cleaning products listed in the Green Cleaning Policy are Ecologo certified.
Since only two of eleven cleaning products do not satisfy sustainability criteria of LEED Canada EB:O&M credit EQc3.3, this is appears to be sufficient to satisfy the 30% sustainable purchases requirement. On future projects following the LEED Canada EB:O&M green cleaning compliance path, please ensure to include completed LEED EB: O&M letter templates for each of the three EQc3 credits pursued.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
29
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
CAA
0
0 Credit 1.2
Innovation in Design
Solid Waste Management, Ongoing Consumables
1st REVIEW The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template for Solid Waste Management, Ongoing Consumables and a credit description following the compliance path from LEED Canada‐EB:O&M 2009 MRc7. In addition, the applicant has provided a copy of CIR 443, a copy of the building's Solid Waste Management policy, a spreadsheet tracking solid waste diversion for the period of February 2011 to February 2012, and a summary spreadsheet of lamp recycling during the 2011 calendar year.
No evidence of battery diversion was included in the submittals. Please confirm if any batteries were disposed of during the performance period. If so, please provide documentation that they were diverted from landfill.
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative) clarifying that battery recycling bins were not full during the performance period and so no batteries were picked up for recycling during that time. In addition, the applicant provided a copy of the waste memo from the building's waste/recycling contractor verifying that a battery recycling program is available and pictures of battery collection bins.
Credit achievement anticipated.
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
30
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
0 Credit 1.3
CAA
Innovation in Design
Building Exterior & Hardscape Management Plan
1st REVIEW The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template for a Building Exterior & Hardscape Management Plan and a credit description following the compliance path from LEED Canada‐EB:O&M 2009 SSc2. In addition, the applicant has provided a copy of the Building Exterior & Hardscape Management Plan, as well as MSDS for dishwashing detergent and ice‐melting salt.
Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
1
0
0 Credit 1.4
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
Innovation in Design
Green Education Program
1st REVIEW The applicant has submitted the signed LEED letter template and a credit description for a Green Education Program. The applicant has also provided a detailed narrative overview of the elements of the program, along with screenshots from the PEO website's sustainability page and slides from a presentation on the building's sustainable features that is given quarterly to PEO members and volunteers. The applicant has followed the compliance path for a Green Education Program detailed in the LEED Canada‐NC 1.0 Reference Guide Addendum. To demonstrate compliance with the active education element of office tours, please provide a drawing showing the walking path and script for the tour.
CAA
d
h
d
Credit achievement pending.
2nd REVIEW
The applicant has submitted a brief response narrative (as part of the overall submission narrative), along with marked‐up plans showing the proposed tour path and a document with presentation files and a copy of the tour script.
The tour script only includes a brief mention of sustainability (via a quotation) on the first page of the script, and includes a brief list of "LEED Compliant Features" on other pages. It is not clear that the tour's focus is on sustainable living using the project as an example, as detailed in the LEED Canada‐NC 1.0 Reference Guide Addendum. Please revise the tour script to include additional references to sustainability features of the project.
Credit achievement pending.
FINAL REVIEW
The applicant has submitted an updated tour script and PowerPoint presentation slides. The revised tour script focuses more extensively on the sustainability features of the project building including sustainable design features and processes.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
31
2013‐12‐20
LEED_Canada‐CI‐Final Review‐14932‐PEO Stage2‐131220
1
0
CAA
0 Credit 2
1st REVIEW
LEED® Accredited Professional
The applicant has resubmitted the signed LEED letter template declaring that Jim Lord was a principal participant in the project. The applicant has also submitted a copy of Jim Lord's LEED AP certificate. Credit achievement anticipated.
2nd REVIEW
FINAL REVIEW
Credit achievement anticipated.
Credit achieved.
CaGBC LEED Canada‐CI Review Report
32
2013‐12‐20