Green Building Credits:

The Next Frontier for TDM

Marco Iacampo, City of Toronto

OverviewGreen Building Movement

Whole Building Energy

Alternative Commuting Credit (LEED EB:OM)

Case Study: Exchange Tower, Toronto

New Opportunities

Green Building 101

Energy- Envelope

- HVAC

Waste &

Materials

- Reduce- Reuse

- Recycle

Water- Demand & conservation

IEQ- Occupant

comfort

Location

TRANSPORTATION

Market Forces

$

Building Energy Showdown Operating Use vs. Transportation Use

Average Commute Distance

20 km

Average fuel economy 9 km/liter

Work days 235 days/yr

Average fuel consumption per year

1,030 liters/yr

Transportation – energy use per employee/year

381 kWh/m2/yr

Operating – energy use perEmployee/year

293 kWh/m2/year

Wilson, Navaro: Environmental Building News

Building Energy Showdown (con’t)

30%

137%

% T

ran

sp

ort

ati

on

exceed

s

Op

era

tin

g

BaselineGreen

Building

Rating Systems

BOMA BESt/GO GREEN

Canadian standard for sustainability certification – existing buildings

1 billion square feet of commercial real estate

Toronto Green Standard

Applies to new development in Toronto

R-2000

Technical performance standard for new homes

What is the LEED®?

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED)

Third-party rating system

Internationally recognized benchmarking

Holistic Approach to building performance

Recognizes magnitude of transportation energy and impacts on human health and GHG emissions

LEED® for Existing BuildingsSUSTAINABLE SITES

Alternative Commuting Transportation

SS WE EA MR EQ IO RP

Credit 4

3 - 15 Points

Case Study: Exchange Tower

Building Profile:

130 King St. W, Toronto

Built: 1981

Home of TSX

36 floors of office space

992 parking spaces

1,000,000+ sq. ft

3,030 building occupants

Turnkey Program

Develop commuter survey & sampling approach

Marketing Plan

Methodology & Quantification Report

Ongoing Commuter Workplace Program

Project Objectives

1. Determine number of Exchange Tower employees that use sustainable methods of commuting to work.

2. Understand current commuting behaviours and travel patterns to inform a TDM plan.

Approach

Quantify Compliance

Room for Improvement?

Satisfied?

Retry Document Compliance

MethodologyCOMMUTER SURVEY

Variation of the Smart Commute survey

Online and paper versions

TIMING

‘Typical workweek’ in the Fall 2010

PROMOTIONS & INCENTIVES

Desk drop, lobby posters, media screens, onsite event

Methodology (con’t) SAMPLING

Random sample of occupants

Established threshold: +/3 pts. 95% confidence

QUALITY CONTROLS

IP restriction to prevent multiple online surveys

Cross-referenced tenant list

Comparison with aggregated data – comparable properties

Commuter ComparisonConventional

Commuting

SOV

Conventionally powered

Alternative Commuting

Transit

Cycle & walk

Carpool

Telecommute

AWA

Fuel-efficient vehicle

BASELINE SURVEY SAMPLE

Survey – Commuter Data

Q5: How did you commute to work each day last week?

Drive Alone

Transit

Cycle

Walk Telework

Taxi I didn’t commute(i.e. sick day, vacation)

Monday X

Tuesday X

Wednesday

X

Thursday X

Friday X

Reduction in Conventional

Commuting Trips

[SUSTAINABLE TRIPS : SOV] – NON-TRIPS=

Points% RCCT POINTS

10.00% 3

13.75% 4

17.50% 5

21.25% 6

25.00% 7

31.25% 8

37.50% 9

43.75% 10

50.00% 11

56.25% 12

62.50% 13

68.75% 14

75.00% 15

RCCT 95%

SubmittalsMethodology & Protocols Report:

• Letter of Attestation

• Narrative description of survey implementation

• Results Analysis

• Credit template

AchievementFirst LEED® Gold Certified

building in Canada in partnership with TMA

Smart Commute program:

Carpool Zone Service

Ongoing Employee Engagement events

Monitoring & Reporting

TMA New OpportunitiesProven LEED® program

Recruit new clients

Cost-effective approach

New revenue stream

Secure long-term commitment to Smart Commute workplace program

Thanks!

Marco IacampoSr. Environmental Planner

City of Toronto

miacamp@toronto.ca416.392.6063