MMM Offices, Kitchener, Ontario

For more information see iisbecanada.ca/sb-14

Synopsis

Building Data

Building TypeNew build, small office building

ClimateHumid Continental - warm summers(4,194 HDD, 201 CDD)

Age5+ years, constructed in 2009

Construction Cost$5,500,000($2,900 / m2)

Net Conditioned Area1897 m2

Energy Model EE4

Green RatingLEED-NC platinum LEED-CI platinum LEED-EBOM platinum

Architect Robertson Simmons Architects Inc.

Mechanical / Energy Engineer Enermodal Engineering(now MMM Group)

The MMM office building achieves very low energy and water use by maximising daylight, views and natural ventilation with a narrow footprint, careful orientation and a high performance building envelope. It features simple HVAC systems, re-naturalization of the surrounding environment and water collection.

The MMM Kitchener office is a small office building located in Kitchener, Ontario. This building was initiated for their own use by Enermodal Engineering (now MMM Group). Completed in 2009, this building has become one of the highest performance office buildings in Canada.

This achievement began with an integrated design process and has carried through to a management team that diligently monitors and manages many aspects of the building’s performance.

The project involves deliberate siting of the building, the incorporation of salvaged and recycled materials, innovative HVAC design including the use of earth tubes for pre-treating ventilation air, high performance glazing and shading, incentive programs to encourage employees to drive fuel efficient automobiles, and the smallest allowable parking footprint.

The building is the embodiment of many years of experience and experimenting by a progressive Canadian engineering firm.

Design Features

The MMM Office Building is a predominately open-concept space with some enclosed offices, located primarily along the east and west ends. The long, narrow building footprint (12 m in depth) ensures all employees have views, natural daylighting, and an operable window.

A central atrium with a skylight provides lighting for the stairway and circulation areas. The building’s east-west orientation minimizes the number of windows that receive low-angle glare. Any glare that does occur on the south side is dealt with by automatic blinds controlled by light sensors, with an option for occupant override.

The building provides a higher level of insulation than typical office buildings, and a significant amount of occupant control of their internal condition. Efficient lighting systems are used throughout.

Materials are chosen to minimise their impact on the indoor environment and to be local or recycled. The building was designed to incorporate 5 kW of photo-voltaic generation capacity on its roof (only recently installed), and rainwater is collected for non-potable uses.

An evening view of the MMM Office Building. Missing is the natural vegetation which has taken over since this photo was taken.

View of the central atrium, which includes a three-storey glass rendering of the Grand River. The long, narrow building footprint provides daylighting and access to views.

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

SECOND, THIRD FLOOR PLAN

0 1 2 4 8m

N

TYPICALOpen Plan Office SpaceEnclosed Office Spaces

Atrium / Central StaircaseSupport & Ancillary Spaces

MMM Offices

For more information see iisbecanada.ca/sb-14

The building consumes only 1% more energy than the target set during design.

The construction cost for this project was similar to a typical low-rise office buildings in Ontario.

The water use of 3.6 m3/occupant/year is significantly less than a typical office building, which consumes on average 7.3 m3/occupant/year.

The graph shows relatively stable energy use over the course of the past four years. This data has been weather normalized to remove the effect of climate in year over year comparisons.

View of the solar panel arrays on the roof of the MMM Office Building. The arrays have been operational since September 2013.

The Building Performance Evaluation for the MMM office building was carried out in July 2014 and involved the collection and analysis of design documentation, energy and water meter data, indoor environment measurements, an occupant questionnaire, and interviews with the designer and facilities manager.

The Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 82 kWh/m2/year remains considerably below a typical building of this type in this location, which consumes 372 kWh/m2/year (Natural Resources Canada, 2014). This reflects the careful design process and subsequent care over commissioning and understanding how the building operates.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are also well below typical office buildings despite this being an all-electric building since electricity GHG intensity in Ontario is lower than natural gas.

Good energy performance is achieved by:

The high performance was achieved with little extra construction cost by careful integrated design and attention to detail. This including investing in a better building envelope which reduced HVAC costs, and a simple building structure and shape.

The differences between actual and predicted operating energy and water costs are reflective of the different performance gaps for these resources. The operating energy cost reflects the fact that this is an all-electric building. The unit cost of electricity in Ontario is considerably higher than natural gas, so although the energy use in KWh/m2/year is very low, the energy cost per m2 is not quite so low compared to other buildings.

The water reduction strategy relies on three elements:

Careful selection of fixtures reduce water use significantly but water use patterns in the building limit the amount of collected rain water that can be re-used.

A reasonable construction budget can result in an efficient and effective building.

Fine-tuning of exterior shades and increased virtualization of servers could lead to even greater performance.

RED bar indicates typical performance for the region.

m3/occupant/year

m3/occupant/year

m3/occupant/year

m3/m2/year

Delivered water to the building

Recycled or captured water used in the

project (if available)

Gross water use per occupants

Water use intensity per m2 of

conditioned area

RED bar indicates typical performance for the region.

kWh/m2/year

kgGHG/m2/year

Building energy use intensity for all operating uses

Greenhouse gas from delivered energy for all

operating end uses

$/m2

$/m2/year

$/m2/year

Construction Cost

Annual Operating Water Cost

Annual Operating Energy Cost

Summary of Results

Energy & Emissions

Economic Factors Site & Materials

Water

KEY LESSONS:

KEY LESSONS:

KEY LESSONS:

Specific initiatives to reduce site and materials impacts included:

Garden plots have been made available for employees. On the date of measurement - July 2014 - the plots were in use, and during the lunch break were frequented by employees seeking a snack.

Ener

gy C

onsu

mpt

ion

(kW

h/m

2 /ye

ar)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Reference Predicted 2010 2011 2012 2013

Electricity (kWh/m2)

Natural Gas (kWh/m2)

Weather Normalized Energy Use Intensity

$

• A well-insulated envelope that includes high performance triple glazing. • The mechanical system comprises 3 variable refrigerant flow (VRF) multi-split air source heat pumps which directly condition 60 zones located around the building, each provided with a fan coil unit (FCU).• Ventilation is provided by a de-coupled system of 9 energy recovery ventilators (ERVs) supplied by fresh air pre-warmed through an earth tube. • When appropriate free cooling periods are determined using natural ventilation.

• Eliminating water use for irrigation.• All fixtures are water efficient.• Non - potable water use in the building is provided by harvesting rainwater.

In addition, energy use for domestic hot water is reduced through a heat pump water heater that harvests waste heat from the building’s server room.

Measured gross water use, both per occupant (m3/occupant/year) and per m2 of floor area (m3/m2/year) are close to the predicted performance. The main variation is due to less recycled water being used on-site than expected, and therefore more municipal water being required.

• Reduced number of parking spots• Garden plots for employees• A bioswale to divert parking lot runoff• Drought- resistant, native plants• 10% reused materials and 25% recycled materials (by cost) was used. • For example, the stone façade was salvaged from a nearby church and the beech flooring was harvested from a building in Toronto. • A waste management plan was able to divert 89% of construction waste from landfill.

MMM Offices

For more information see iisbecanada.ca/sb-14

The view of the building from the Grand River. The re-naturalization of the site has been effective, and is not home to many species of native plants and wildflowers.

Air quality is taken into account with several features:

Occupants were asked to fill out an online survey about their indoor environment. Fifty three responses were received, for a participation rate of over 50%. Results from the survey indicated that respondents are most satisfied with lighting conditions and least satisfied with acoustics.

The occupancy figures show that the building is being used at approximately the same occupancy for which it was originally designed.

The occupancy did change over the period of our investigation (from 2012/2013), varying between 65 and 80 occupants for six month periods, and therefore the “actual occupancy value” is a duration weighted average of the individual occupancy values.

Occupancy values are readily available for office buildings with relatively stable work forces. Therefore, in regards to judging the building’s performance on a per occupant basis, office buildings are likely the simplest type of building for which to calculate these values.

People

Hours

Typical daily occupancy during normal operating

conditions

Typical weekly operating hours of building

Mean 6.1 5.8 4.4 5.7 2.3

0.97 0.81 1.09 0.87 1.01Standard Deviation

Sat

isfa

ctio

n Le

vel

7

6

5

4

3

2

1Dissatisfied

Lighting

Ventilation &

Temperature

Acoustics &

Privacy

Non-Speech

Speech

Satisfied

Summary of Results Occupancy Factors

Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)

!

Satu

ratio

n Te

mpe

ratu

re (°

C)

Relative Humidity 10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Dry Bulb Temperature (°C)20 30

20

15

Occupancy loads are a significant driver of energy and water use, and are important for organizations to track over time.

Energy efficient offices often suffer with acoustic problems and require particular attention from designers. Minimizing reflective surfaces and using noise masking are two options for reducing this problem.

KEY LESSONS:

KEY LESSONS:

Overall, the building used a wide variety of strategies to reach ambitious performance targets in terms of energy and water use, as well as for the indoor environment. Innovative approaches to heating, cooling and ventilation, stormwater management and harvesting, and office layout were combined with high performance materials to produce a building which is largely successful in meeting its ambitious targets.

This demonstrates that thoughtful designers can use the best of building science and construction materials to make high performance buildings at a reasonable budget.

View of the abundance of daylighting in the workspace areas.

IEQ spot measurements were taken within the building. For thermal comfort (feet and head height spot measurements) 92% of spaces measured fell within the acceptable

• Ventilation levels are controlled by CO2 sensors maintaining adequate ventilation. • Ventilation is provided by a decoupled system of 9 energy recovery ventilators (ERVs) supplied by fresh air pre-warmed through an earth tube. • A 4.75 m3/s (10,000 cfm) modulating plenum fan located at the top of the central atrium drives air flow through the building. • As well printers and office equipment that contribute pollutants to the work environment are concentrated in rooms where ventilation air is exhausted directly to the exterior.• Finally all furnishings, carpets, sealants and adhesives were chosen to comply with low VOC emissions standards.

range for ASHRAE thermal comfort, with the remaining being too cool. The occupant survey score confirm this with 96.2% of occupants satisfied (mean score of 5.8 out of 7).

Spot measurements of CO2 levels in the building ranged from 616-1021 ppm, and are 200-600 ppm higher than the outdoor levels. 93% of the spaces are within an acceptable range for CO2 concentrations. The measurements were taken on a day when natural ventilation and free cooling was supposedly in use.

The lighting measurements from spot daylight factor and luminance data collection suggest this building is not meeting the reference target for lighting levels. The daylight factor results were below the target values for 77% of the spaces on the day of measurement. However, occupants expressed a high degree of satisfaction with the lighting environment (with a mean of 6.1 out of 7).

Overall, the absence of questionnaire complaints about over-lighting, and the fact that not all electric overhead lights were in use on an overcast day suggest some success in this area.

Temperature measurements mapped onto ASHRAE 55 thermal comfort zones (red - summer, blue - winter)