Property Management Report - October 2009

RepoRtProperty Management

A RegionAl RepoRt focusing on the gtA, hAmilton & niAgARA

octoBeR 2009 Vol.16 no.6

Water Quality Factors

Winter Cleaning Loads

Ontario’s conservation and demand management agenda calls on electricity customers to moderate energy consumption during peak demand periods. Those willing and able to reschedule the activities that require a lot of electricity will pay less for their energy consumption during off-hours.

However, questions arise about the sub-metering technology required to measure electricity use. Who will pay to install, monitor and iron out the problems arising in any new system? Who indeed?

Such questions give rise to different opinions or different understandings of the same concept. Facilitated dispute resolution can be a cost-effective approach to working through differing

opinions and conflicts, particularly when the ongoing relationship is valued and there is something at stake.

The sub-metering issue provides a good example. The Ontario Energy Board’s (OEB) Smart Sub-metering Code, enacted in 2008, covers technical requirements, standards of business practice, conduct, as well as billing and collection procedures.

Meanwhile, the Association of Condominium Managers Ontario (ACMO) and associated stakeholders responded to requirements in the Energy Conservation Leadership Act, 2006 (now repealed and largely rolled into the Green Energy and Economy Act, 2009) that mandated condominiums corporations to install a form of

Contents

Mediation and sub-metering 1Winter Maintenance 7Piping Materials and Upgrades 9

Continued on page 4.

By Lavonne McCumber Eals

Finding Common Ground in the sub-metering DebateMediation Meets Demand Management

sub-metering Decision

DON’T MISS THIS OPPORTUNITY!With a total attendance of over 23,600, PM Expo 2008was sold out for the sixth consecutive year.

Consider the value of PM Expo and book your exhibitspace now!

ANY QUESTIONS?Call 416-512-0203

RESERVE YOUR SPACE NOW!To reserve your exhibit location or to receive additional information, please contact Jeff Ingram at (416) 512-3811 or send anemail to [email protected]

Your Customers and Prospects Will Look for You at PM Expo!

VISIT OUR SHOW WEBSITE

www.pmexpo.com

NetworkingLeadsStrategy

Launch New & GreenProducts

MarketingExposureBranding

Meet Key Decision-Makers atPM Expo: Canada’s LargestReal Estate and PropertyManagement Show!PM Expo is a powerful vehicle to launch new and greenproducts, generate leads and meet contacts and clientsface-to-face.

IT’S ALL HERE!

December 2-4, 2009Metro Toronto Convention CentreSouth Building

M E D I A S P O N S O R S

©2009 MMPC Expositions ULC.

PM Expo Ad 2009 FULL:PM Expo Ad 2008 FULL 2/13/09 12:15 PM Page 1

PM Expo Ad 2009 FULL.pdf 2/13/09 12:40:01 PM

From the Editor

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT REPORT OcTObER 2009 3

PUbLISHER Sean Foley EDITOR Barbara Carss [email protected] Ext. 236

ASSISTANT EDITOR Ashley Ward [email protected] Ext. 233 cONTRIbUTING WRITERS Patrice Dumas, Stephen Hanig, Lavonne McCumber Eals, Wolfgang Osada

ADVERTISING SALES Sean Foley [email protected] Ext. 225

Atif Malik [email protected] Ext. 240

Steve McLinden [email protected] Ext. 239

Paul Murphy [email protected] Ext. 264

SENIOR DESIGNER Annette Carlucci Wong [email protected] Ext. 231

DESIGNER Ian Clarke [email protected] Ext. 243

PRODUcTION MANAGER Rachel Selbie [email protected] Ext. 223

cIRcULATION MANAGER Cindy Younan [email protected] Ext. 232 Property Management Report is produced as a supplement to canadian Property Management magazine, published 8 times a year by:

5255 Yonge St., Suite 1000 Toronto, Ontario M2N 6P4 PRESIDENT Kevin Brown [email protected] TEL: (416) 512-8186 FAx: (416) 512-8344 E-mail: [email protected]

Chasing the swedes AgainIn the 1970s, a national advertising campaign reported that the average 60-year-old Swede was more physically fit than the average 30-year-old Canadian. Some of us could plead youthful gullibility at the time, but a significant proportion of grownups also accepted the claim unquestioningly.

Perhaps people were relying on anecdotal evidence – travelling to Sweden where they encountered scores of sleek seniors daintily dining at the Take-Only-What’s-Sensible Smorgasbords that were presumably prevalent across the land – but no statistical data was presented to substantiate Canadians’ sedentary status.

In 2009, in contrast, it’s easy to find the numbers to prove we’ve fallen behind performance levels in other countries. Don’t look for the Canadian delegation among the keeners at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen this December.

The good new is, the real estate sector has been prompted to action and is taking steps to further some gains made in recent years. Notably, a study and recommendations released by the National Roundtable on Environment and the Economy and Sustainable Development Technology Canada earlier this year revealed that the average energy intensity in commercial buildings rose from 1.69 gigajoules (GJ) per square metre in 1990 to 1.85 GJ/m2 in 2003 then dropped back to 1.62 GJ/m2 by 2005. Since then, programs like LEED and BOMA BESt have rapidly evolved from niche movements to widely accepted industry practices.

Three prominent industry associations – the Real Property Association of Canada, the Building Owners and Managers Association of Canada and the Canada Green Building Council – have joined forces to set an ambitious goal for energy efficiency in Canadian office buildings. The 20 by ‘15 campaign is aiming for an average energy intensity of 20 equivalent kilowatt-hours (ekWh) per rentable square foot (0.77 GJ/m2) by 2015.

Since commercial and institutional buildings now account for 14% of end-use energy consumption and 13% of carbon emissions across the country, achieving the target will also help get Canada on track to make pledged greenhouse gas reductions. And once again, the Swedes are role models.

“Sweden is just as cold as Canada. Why are we three times worse than most Nordic countries in terms of carbon emissions per capita?” Michael Brooks, Chief Executive Officer of REALpac, reflected at the launch of the 20 by ‘15 campaign in late September.

Elsewhere in this issue, Lavonne McCumber Eals looks at energy management from a different perspective, as a mediator helping landlords and tenants work through the implementation of sub-metering. Dispute resolution could play an increasingly important role in the energy sector, particularly relating to conflict around the location of electricity generating plants and the route of transmission lines.

Barbara [email protected]

4 OcTObER 2009 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT REPORT

smart meters by 2010. This included legal studies and detailed information outlining anticipated problems related to legislating sub-metering into the condominium community.

Still more conflict arose in the rental housing sector (see Property Management Report, April 2009) as landlords and property managers pushed forward with sub-meter installation even though wording in the Electricity Act indicated it was not applicable for existing tenants. An OEB compliance bulletin halted the activity earlier this year, but the conclusions of an OEB proceeding led to a new ruling clearly authorizing sub-meters in industrial, commercial and multi-residential rental buildings – with some conditions for an energy audit, written tenant permission and adherence to the Smart Sub-metering Code provisions.

cONFLIcT ZONESDiffering opinions continue to create conflict between tenants and landlords, however. Smart sub-metering encourages responsibility for energy consumption and gives direct control to consumers who could benefit. Nevertheless, landlords have control over upkeep and maintenance appliances, windows, insulation and other building components that can affect energy efficiency.

One of the conflicts related to sub-metering concerns calculations for additional charge backs for common areas. This is especially true where commercial and residential facilities share a building.

Sub-metering is intended to deal with the issue of where costs should be attributed, but questions regarding charge back percentages for common space have shown up in litigation. The unit factor which is commonly used to determine charge backs can be challenged depending on the building’s particular situation.

In 934859 Alberta Ltd. V. Condominium Corporation No. 0312180 it was found that considerations other than unit factors formed an appropriate base for attribution of (condo) fees with residential and commercial units and can be applied when some receive a greater benefit from the use of shared or common space. In this case, the Limitations Act restricted the scope of period in question to the two previous years. Nevertheless getting to that ruling was an unexpec ted expense and source of frustration.

Planning before disputes arise and the parties get entrenched in their opinions is key to avoiding unnecessary litigation costs. A clear mediation process shows everyone the steps that will unfold if a problem cannot be resolved without assistance.

Set out the rules that will govern the process. Cover how the mediator is to be chosen, how the documents wil l be exchanged, the format to describe the dispute(s) and an estimate of the length of the process. Each side is responsible for its costs, including an equal share of the mediation fees.

Opening a discussion with stakeholders can help avoid misunderstandings, which can save time, money and future frustrations. Mediation employs a clear, effective process to help each party better understand the other side’s thinking. After relevant discussion is facilitated, an enhanced perspective is gained.

Opposing par t ies w i l l have more confidence that their concerns, needs and interests have been considered. All parties can then work to a mutually agreeable solution suitable to the context. pMr

Lavonne McCumber Eals, B.A., M.E.S., is a trained mediator on the roster for the Ontario Mandatory Mediation Program. For more information, see www.aplaceformediation.ca.

Continued from page 1.

Landlord/Tenant Relations

Planning before disputes arise and the parties get entrenched in their opinions is

key to avoiding unnecessary litigation costs.

Landlord/Tenant Relations


OEB DECISION A FORERUNNER TO PROVINCIAL LEGISLATIONThe Ontario Energy Board’s (OEB) recent decision allowing landlords of commercial, industrial or multi-residential rental buildings to install smart sub-metering systems to measure electricity consumption on a unit-by-unit basis is considered an interim measure until the Ontario government can enact legislation to authorize the activity. The OEB order also comes with a number of conditions to ensure that tenants agree and that licensed sub-meter providers install all required equipment.

Prior to the August decision, sub-metering activity had been on hold since March when the OEB’s Chief Compliance Officer issued a bulletin stating: “The installation of sub-metering systems in residential complexes, other than condominiums, is not currently authorized by the Electricity Act or regulation. Therefore, such activities are currently prohibited based on Section 53.18 of the Electricity Act.”

More than 250 affected parties then made submissions to the OEB proceeding examining the issue. Of these, Paul Sommerville, the OEB’s Presiding Member for the decision, notes “an overwhelming number came from bitterly unhappy tenants and tenant organizations.”

The new rules require residential landlords to obtain written consent from tenants, engage an independent third party to conduct an energy audit, and use a clear and transparent methodology for calculating applicable rent reductions. Commercial landlords will also have to obtain tenants’ consent in writing.

The decision is compatible with the Ontario government’s stated intentions to promote smart sub-meters and allows this agenda to move forward while consultations occur and new legislation is crafted. “It is the Board’s view that, during the period between now and the time the government is able to put in place its comprehensive legislative package, the public interest requires that some measure of regulatory guidance is given,” the OEB decision states.

“The Board is also mindful of the importance that the smart sub-metering program plays in the government’s overall energy strategy. As things stand now [prior to the OEB decision and order], no discretionary metering activity by landlords in residential complexes or industrial, commercial or office building settings is authorized. The Board considers it to be in the public interest to remove such barriers as it reasonably can to the orderly and lawful implementation of this important government policy.”

While our competitors are just starting to “go green”...

905.761.9411~ www.mainlineservices.com

SERVICESINC.

MAINLINESU

CCESSFUL THROUGH

ISO 9001 + 14001 CERTIFIED

with a deeper commitment


CONTACT US TO HELP YOU APPLY TODAY

[email protected]

NOW AVAILABLE TO BUILDING OWNERS AND TENANTS!

Lower your electricity bills.

We’ll pay you to do it.Update your facilities, lower your energy costs and reduce your environmental footprint.The BOMA Toronto Conservation and Demand Management (CDM) Program is off ering $60 million in incentives to commercial, industrial, retail and hospitality owners and tenants to reduce electricity use in the City of Toronto. Qualifi ed system retrofi ts include: lighting, metering, motors, air conditioning, windows, insulation, control systems and many others.

.Simple Application Process .Quick Project Approval .Rapid Incentive Payments

How to begin? $5,500 is currently available to help you assess your energy cost saving potential and submit your funding application.

BOMA_CDM_CSB_ad.indd 1 22/09/09 12:27 PM

Now that’s a bright idea.

416.759.9600 www.eco-techroof.ca

6 Curity Ave. Unit 7, Toronto ON Visit us online or contact our office for more information.

The roo�ing system with the lowest carbon footprint is the one which:

a) lasts the longestb) is priced competitivelyc) saves your building the most in energy costsd) does not require removal & disposal of your existing roofe) All of the above An

swer

: (e)

All o

f the

abov

e.

Seasonal Maintenance


Cold Weather Cleaning Entrapment Averts Tracking of Winter Debris

By Patrice Dumas

During winter months, snow and ice can infiltrate buildings and put every occupant and floor surface at risk. Salt, sand and moisture form a triumvirate of hazards and nuisances for cleaning staff and anyone walking where they collect. Substances carried indoors on footwear can deface and damage flooring, and, in the case of snow and ice, lead to puddles and slippery surfaces inside a facility, potentially causing slip-and-fall accidents.

Property and facility managers should prepare for the stormy season with:• High-performancemattingsystems• Wet/dryvacs• Portableextractionmachinestocleanmatting• Plentyofdrymicrofibremops• Safetysignage

Rock salt’s price point makes it a mainstay for most facilities’ snow and ice removal plans despite the harm it can cause to concrete, interior floor surfaces, vegetation and wildlife. Sand provides slip-and-fall protection and has fewer negative environmental effects, but it is unwanted indoors

where it can soil and/or erode floor finishes and be tracked throughout the building.

Almost all snow- and ice-melting products can permeate floor finishes, creating unsightly residue or discoloration. A neutralizing conditioner can help reduce the risk of damage and remove residue. Following the conditioner, application of an all-purpose cleaner to further maintain the surface and protect its finish.

Regular vacuuming, mopping, and buffing can minimize any problems associated with sand, including scratched surfaces. Autoscrubbers, which can deep-scrub floor surfaces and remove embedded soils and contaminants often missed by a mop, could also augment the daily floor care regimen in the winter months.

cOSTSNevertheless, floor care chemicals and equipment tend to be expensive, while labour costs to meet winter cleaning demands, especially in high-traffic facilities, add significantly more to the operating budget.

The Internat ional Sanitar y Supply Association (ISSA), estimates that up to 24 pounds of dirt can be tracked into a facility by 1,000 people during a 20-day work period. Approximately 70 to 80% of the dust, grime and dirt in public buildings is tracked in from the outside, and dirt and sand accumulate disproportionately during snowy, icy, and wintry conditions.

ISSA calculates the cost to remove just one pound of dirt after it is tracked through a building can exceed $500. High-performance matting helps cut those expenses by capturing outdoor soils and contaminants.

RULE OF 15A five-foot length of scraper mats outside the facility is the first contact point for removing debris from the bottom of footwear. Next, facility managers should provide at least five feet of wiper/scraper matting just inside the entrance to further remove soils and moisture on shoe bottoms. Finally, the wiper mat is the last line of defence.

2009074_PropertyManagement.FINAL.indd 1 10/15/09 12:07:39 PM


Seasonal Maintenance

Forest_Condo_Sept09.pdf 10/7/09 10:32:37 AM

WINTER MAINTENANCE IMPERATIVE FOR CARPETS

By Stephen Hanig

Many of today’s commercial carpets are made of synthetic fibres that help hide dirt and soils. However, with traffic, this soil can grind into carpet fibres, robbing the carpet of its original lustre, colour and texture.

The Carpet and Rug Institute recommends more frequent vacuuming in winter months. Upright vacuums with rotating brushes are best for loosening soils and removing them from carpet fibres.

Other carpet care suggestions for winter include:• Vacuumcarpetsmakingmultiplepasses in

different directions. This helps remove deeply embedded soils.

• Attendtospotsandstainsquickly.Thelongera spill or stain stays on a carpet, the more difficult it can be to remove. Blot stained areas to remove excess soil and moisture. Then use a professional carpet spotting kit to remove stains.

• Don’tpostponecleaning.Thereisatendencyto delay carpet extraction during the winter months based on the assumption that carpets may soon be soiled again and that the process is not cost-effective. However, just the opposite is true. Keeping carpets clean helps prevent re-soiling and can significantly increase the lifespan of the carpets.

• Turn up the heat in the cleaning process.Because of their added flexibility, portable carpet extractors are often preferred in larger facilities. However, some machines do not heat the water/cleaning solution. Heat improves the effectiveness of cleaning chemicals, often necessitating fewer chemicals and making these machines more environmentally preferable. Select portables that heat the water/cleaning solution to 100° C (212° F) for best results.

StephenHanig isVicePresidentofSalesandMarketing for U.S. Products, manufacturers of professional carpet, floor and restoration equipment. For more information, see the web site at www.usproducts.com.

It, too, should present another five feet of matting to absorb remaining soils and moisture before pedestrians step onto to the hard surface of the floor. In total, this three-part matting system comprises what industry experts call the “rule of 15” – a network that the average person will step on four to six times with each foot.

A product must have a warranty for a minimum one-year lifespan to be classified as high-performance, but some high-performance mats have warranties that extend for several years. Regardless, they will need to be properly maintained and vacuumed daily.

Ongoing moisture control is especially important in winter. Saturated matting is largely ineffective so property managers and maintenance staff should pay attention to entranceways and high-traffic areas. Replacement mats should be in stock to provide replacements quickly when necessary. pMr

Patrice Dumas is Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Mat Tech, a Canadian-based matting manufacturer located in Granby, Quebec. For more information, see the web site at www.mattech.ca.


Cost, reliability, safety and long-term maintenance requirements are among the many considerations in choosing a piping material. In recent years, polymer pipes have gained market share, but there have been some concerns that they disseminate perceptible tastes and odours.

A study at Virginia Tech University’s Civil and Environmental Engineering Department found that different plastics leach differing degrees of polymer additives, organic compounds and oxidation of the surface of the pipe as water passes through. It assessed chlorinated polyvinyl chloride (CPVC), copper, high-density polyethylene (HDPE), epoxy lining and PEX piping.

The test was designed to accomplish two objectives: (1) to investigate the sensory properties of water with either chlorine or chloramines when it came into contact with different piping materials; (2) to investigate changes in residual disinfectant and leaching of organic chemicals from pipe when in contact with drinking water.

All testing was conducted under typical drinking water quality conditions. The Utility Quick Test, a standard leaching protocol for new materials, was conducted at room temperature using a low alkalinity water of pH 7.8-8 with no disinfectant, 2 mg/L chlorine, or 4 mg/L monochloramine. This test consisted of three consecutive 72-96 hour leaching/flushing periods and included triplicate testing of all pipe types.

Among the polymer materials tested, CPVC imparted the fewest organic compounds to the water, consumed the least amount of disinfectants, and produced no noticeable odours.

HDPE consumed a low amount of residual disinfectant and released only about 0.1 mg/L organic carbon to the water including phenol, bisphenol-A, tetradecane, cyclohexadiene, cyclohexanone, and cyclopentanone. The overall odour imparted to the water from HDPE had a moderate intensity and was described as “waxy/plastic/citrus.” Panelists described the HDPE odour as “chemical/plastic” in the presence of chlorine and “waxy-crayon/plastic” in water with chloramines. The presence of disinfectants did not seem to alter the intensity of the odours.

Various PEX piping products performed differently in the tests, with some pipe producing more odours than others. Water in contact with the best performing PEX product

possessed weak to modern intensity odours, leached about 1mg/L organic carbon, and consumed up to 0.5 mg/L free chlorine. Ethyl-t-buyl ether (EtBE) was found to contribute significantly to the characteristic “burning-solvent/plastic” odour of the better-performing PEX pipe.

Epoxy lining imparted a moderate “plastic-putty-glue” odour, leaching 0.4-0.6 mg/L organic carbon, including the compounds bisphenol A, styrene, toluene, nonylphenol and

Water Quality FactorsPiping Can Impart Tastes and Odours

building Systems

benzaldehyde. It also consumed nearly all the residual chlorine and chloramines. Meanwhile, copper consumed nearly all the residual disinfectant but released few organic compounds or odours.

Most materials performed well in certain categories, but under-performed in others, whereas CPVC was consistent in all categories – leaching the fewest Total Organic Compounds (TOC) and having the least impact on water taste and smell.

Different plastics leach differing degrees of polymer additives, organic

compounds and oxidation of the surface of the pipe as water passes through.

building Systems


Eservuswrong size supplied

new

Study findings suggest that it is the specific organic chemicals and not the concentration of organic carbon present in the water that determines odour intensity and aesthetic impact. Nor did there appear to be any correlation between the type of disinfectant and amount of organic carbon leached. Both chlorine and monochloramine had minimal effect on the intensity of the odours associated with the polymer. pMr

The preceding is based on research conducted by Andrea Diet r ich, Professor of Civ i l and Environmental Engineering at Virginia Tech. For more information, see the web site at www.eng.vt.edu/main/index.php

REPAIR OPTION REINS IN RETROFIT COSTS

By Wolfgang Osada

On the domestic hot water side of the equat ion , a Toronto condomin ium corporation recently opted for epoxy coating to repair pinhole leaks in the copper piping system of a 20-year-old, two-tower complex. The cost of replacing of the existing pipes with new copper piping was estimated at $4.5 million, not including the costs for subsequent drywall repair in the condo’s 812 units.

The epoxy lining alternative was less expensive and created less disruption for unit owners. First, the pipe was cleaned with heated pressurized air and various pneumatic processes to remove any contaminants in the pipe and leave a smooth surface for epoxy application. A liquid epoxy was then pushed through the pipe with heat and pressurized air. This fills the pinholes and protects the pipes from corrosion and erosion.

“The review of the technology, the var ious companies which offer the solution, and the financial impact to our owners required a very thorough due diligence process to be undertaken,” notes Ken Wigley, the President of Board ofDirectorsofNumberOneYorkQuay.

Wolfgang Osada is with RIKOS, the company conducting the epoxy relining retrofit at One York Quay. For more information, see the web site at www.rikos.com .

Made affordable with the valuable savings you can earn with an environmentally friendly,energy efficient lighting retrofit from the experts at Nexstar Lighting

What you do with the savings is your business, our business is to provide the best energy efficient

lighting retrofit while maximizing incentive rebates and continual long-term savings for our customers.

Nexstar’s customers are saving on average over $5,000.00 – per month!

Nexstar Lighting Toll Free: 866-291-1266 www.nexstarlighting.com

Go green and be the envy of the neighborhood -

in business and pleasure!

Contact us today for your FREE, no-obligation Energy Audit.

FullPg_AD_NXT:Nextstar Lighing Ad 8/13/09 9:20 PM Page 1

Better Buildings Partnership - Multifamily Buildings Incentive offers assistance tailored to the needs of multi-residential building owners and property managers in the 416 area code to support energy projects that reduce energy operating costs and environmental footprint.

Current Incentives for Multifamily Buildings:The Multifamily Buildings Incentive offers condominiums and multi-unit apartments in the private and social housing sector attractive fi nancial incentives for any projects taken on since July 2006:

$400 per kW of peak demand reduction

or

$0.05 per kWh annual energy reduction

*Incentive payments are limited to 40% of total eligible costs.

You Can Benefi t From Participation in BBP Verifi es and ensures accuracy of energy and cost savings through

timely evaluation of projects

Financially rewards your efforts that can facilitate further projects

Provides liaising assistance with energy management consultants

Helps your organization achieve environmental and sustainability

commitments to investors and other stakeholders

Better Buildings Partnership - Multifamily Buildings Incentive

NEW

INCENTIVES

Contact Us For More Information:Social Housing Sector: Natalie D. Maniates E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 416-397-9217

Privately Owned Buildings and Condominiums:Tom ChessmanE-mail: [email protected] Phone: 416-392-1501

BBP_TorontoAD_May09.indd 1 10/7/09 4:07:36 PM

Property Management Report - October 2009

Documents

Transcript of Property Management Report - October 2009