LEED Canada Forum
If you're working on a LEED Canada project, here's a user forum just for you! Share your questions, confusions, challenges, successes, and lessons learned in this space.
Note that in many respects, LEED Canada, from the Canadian Green Building Council (CaGBC), is very similar to the U.S. version of LEED-NC, and so many questions are answered, and discussions are taking place, through our LEED-NC resources and forums. But if you're dealing with a uniquely Canadian spin on things, this forum is for you.
14 Comments
Canada-NC 1.0 -- EAc1
We are going through the third party reviewer portion of the credit and have one final hiccup. A garage type space is heated and conditioned with an energy recovery unit with gas heating. The baseline system is modeled with a constant volume rooftop unit with an ERV wheel, same as the proposed, but gas heating and DX cooling.
The reviewer is now stating that since the baseline system has cooling, then the proposed (built by now) building needs cooling. ASHRAE 90.1-1999 is the design guide line and section 11.4.3(d) was quoted as stating this is the design criteria. My version of ASHRAE 90.1-1999 states, "Minimum outdoor air ventilation rates shall be the same for both the budget building design and the proposed building. Heat recovery shall be modeled for the budget building design in accordance with 6.3.6.1."
My question is does any one agree with the reviewer regarding the cooling requirement? If the inspector is correct, where do I find this in ASHRAE 90.1 as I cannot find it? Are there different versions of ASHRAE 90.1-1999?
LEED Letter Templates Corrupting, New Versions
I was about to submit my documentation to the CaGBC, when I noticed that my LLT was not functioning properly on the WEp1c3 tab. The final result was right, but some of the numbers were coming out wrong in the middle. I've also had and heard of other people having trouble with fields that get corrupted. I really don't want to have to enter all my data into a new LLT all over again, so I downloaded a new LLT, entered the data for just that credit, printed the pdf and included that in my submission to the CaGBC with a note in the narrative explaining that the LLT had been corrupted.
Has anyone tried this before?
Also, if I fill in all the data for one LLT, and then a new one is uploaded to the website, do I need to fill it all in again, or can I just use the old one?
Amanda,
I have experienced enough trouble with the old LLTs. The CaGBC has been pretty understanding when one or two of the LLT's credit templates malfunction. Just explicitly explain the issue in the narrative as well as summarize the outcomes for the water efficiency credits. If the reviewer ever has an issue with the submission they are not shy to tell you...so unless they say there is a problem, I am sure they will be fine with it as they have in the past. Going forward, use the new LLTs.
SSc6.2 Pollutant Management Plan
As part of this credit, LEED Canada 2009 requires the owner to implement a management plan to minimize pollution and eutrophication1. Eutrophication is the increase in chemical nutrients, such as the nitrogen and phosphorus often found in fertilizers, in an ecosystem. The added nutrients stimulate excessive plant growth, promoting algal blooms or weeds. The enhanced plant growth reduces oxygen in the land and water, reducing water quality and fish and other animal populations. 2. The process by which bodies of water are starved of oxygen and light by algae and other plants that multiply due to excessive concentrations of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous. Typical sources include fertilizer runoff and poorly managed wastewater treatment systems, frequently including home septic systems. of waterways from excess nutrient pollutants such as nitrogen and phosphorus. My civil engineer who had agreed to provide this initially is no longer answering my emails. As such I am attempting to write this myself. My site is a commercial office building on a sea of parking with a cistern, inimal landscaping and permeable pavers at the low end. My plan addresses the cleaning agent for the building exterior meeting Greenseal or Ecologo annual testing of soil (for nutrient levels) followed by aeration and minimal fertilizers on sod. Is this adequate?
The requirements for LEED credit SSc6.2: Stormwater Management, Treatment, are to construct a stormwater treatment system designed to remove 80% of the average annual post-development total suspended solids (TSSTotal suspended solids (TSS) are particles that are too small or light to be removed from stormwater via gravity settling. Suspended solid concentrations are typically removed via filtration.) and 40% of the average annual post-development total phosphorous (TPTotal phosphorus (TP) consists of organically bound phosphates, polyphosphates, and orthophosphates in stormwater, the majority of which originates from fertilizer application. Chemical precipitation is the typical removal mechanism for phosphorus.).
To demonstrate compliance you are definitely on the right track. Be sure to indicate the phosphorous content of all fertilizer to be < 1%. Also indicate the products, equipment and services for all sodding work needed on the project over its life, including sched, maintenance, materials and how the work will be carried out. Be sure to have signed documentation from your landscaping contractor exemplifying that they understood how work is to be carried out in order to achieve the credit.
I would also suggest product sheets for you permeable paver, cistern and a list of the greenseal/ecologo products to be used.
See CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide#265 for a useful Canadian specific question/answer. The submission date is May 2, 2008, but it is still relevant.
Hope this helps!
LEED Canada SS Credit 6.1 - Stormwater - Cistern Sizing
Hi,
The 2009 version of LEED included an interpretation for the SS6.1 credit stating that controling site discharge using storage such as cisterns could meet the credit requirements even if the entire discharge eventually ends up in the municipal system as long as the stormwater is held long enough to reduce the 24-hour peak rate and quantity. However, it states that the cistern has to have enough capacity to account for rainfall stored in the cistern from previous days (you can't assume its empty when the 2 year storm starts. Does anyone know what volume you are expected to assume is still in the cistern from previous days?
Hi Meghan,
On past projects I have done a daily cistern volume analysis including all water in (rain from drainage area) less water out (irrigation, release to municipal storm main, etc) to show how much capacity is available in the cistern. You can find daily rainfall data on the Environment Canada website: http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/Welcome_e.html
Thanks for your response Lindsay. We'll give this a try.
LEED Canada v1.0/2009 IEQc7.1 - ASHRAE 55-2010 acceptable?
Tristan, thanks for creating this forum! I hope fellow Canadian users will share their experiences to build on the information already available in the other US forums.
I just posted this on the NC 2009 IEQc7.1 page, but I'd like to hear from others on Canadian projects. Is ASHRAE 55-2010 (and therefore the ASHRAE Thermal Comfort Tool v2) acceptable in place of 55-2004?
Only 55-2004 is referenced (with no addenda) for v1.0, while 2009 allows addenda to be used if applied for all credits. Technically, 55-2010 is a compilation of all 2004 addenda so I think it is acceptable. I'd appreciate feedback from others to verify or refute my assumptions. Thanks!
Hi Lindsay,
We have been using 55-2004 for all of our LEED2009 projects. Mainly because it is exactly what's referenced in the reference guide. I cannot speak for CaGBC, but I would bet that they would require a CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide to use 55-2010 in conjunction with ASHRAE Thermal Comfort Tool v2.
Looking at the current CIRs on the website, there is nothing mentioned about 55-2010. Also, if you can find a CIR on USGBC that would be a good indicator if this is an OK method. However, the CaGBC will most likely ask for a CIR of their own.
LEED Canada 2009 Letter Templates (LLT)
Hi Everyone,
If anyone has a question regarding the how the LLTs for CaGBC's LEED 2009 program function, just ask away.
I was wondering if someone has had experience with entering IEQc6.2 - Thermal Comfort. When I put in any space, regardless if I state there is a thermal control, the LLT spits back that the space is 100% controlled.
Anyone have a similar experience / found a quick fix?
Hi Lorne,
We (Enermodal) helped the CaGBC in completing the updates to the Canada NC 2009 LEED Letter Template file which was issued at the start of August (2012).
The item noted here, as well as a number of other issues, is corrected in the updated template file (version b).
Version b also includes direction for the split submission approach (design/construction submissions).
Another update is coming out soon to address Regional Priority, based on the results of the recent LEED AP vote.
Download the new version of the templates at: http://bit.ly/NDHavq
This is also a good chance to download and review the updated MPRs and MPR checklist (same link, above)
If you find future errors in the template files, direct those issues to CaGBC's Customer Service, who track errors and coordinate updates.
Hi Braden,
Thanks for the reply! We have updated all of our LLT files and are good to go for our new projects, as well as the ones that are split review.
We are not sure if this is possible at the office, but you would be the best person to ask!
Is there anyway to transfer tabs from an older version of the LLT onto a newer version considering they are locked.
No. Because there were some logic changes to each of the tabs you can't just bring in old tabs.
FYI - with the pending release of Version C (in about a week), I would hold off on updating, if you can, to get the full functionality for the RP points (lets you select province and region, then tells you what is available as an RP point).
Watch the CaGBC website for more info.
Start a new LEED comment thread