The Annual Sunlight Exposure (ASE) metric may be used by project teams to assess glare risks for skylights under this credit. Spaces that receive 1000 Lux for greater than 250 hours during the year ASE (1000,250) are considered at risk of glare.

Any regularly occupied spaces with ASE (1000,250) greater than 10%, must identify how the space is designed to address glare.

All regularly occupied spaces with ASE (1000,250) less than 10% are considered compliant under Green Star credit 12.1 and do not require any additional glare mitigation.

Project teams are expected to provide glare plots documentation within the submission with some commentary on how the space is designed in response to the results.  

Is DW172:2017 an acceptable alternative solution for projects that use bespoke design of kitchen hoods?

Yes. For commercial cooking processes and equipment, kitchen extracts, hoods designed in accordance with (UK) DW172:2017 are considered an acceptable alternative solution to NZBC/G4 and as such are compliant against the NZGBC Credit criteria.

For the purposes of credit criterion 8.3A - 'Removing the Source of Pollutants' in Green Star - Interiors and 9.3A 'Removing the Source of Pollutants' in Green Star - Design & As-Built, where printing and/or photocopying equipment are present within the building, the Blue Angel certificate issued in accordance with one of the following test standards can be used to demonstrate compliance with the credit criterion:

• ECMA-328
• DE-UZ 219

The standard UL 2819 is recognised in Design & As Built NZv1.1 as a Greenguard certificate and should be issued in accordance with the test standard.   

Compliant test standards RAL-UZ 171 and GGPS.003. in Design & As Built NZv1.0 are still acceptable. 

Note: Testing of Emissions in Clause 5.6 of EC-24 requires testing in accordance with RAL-UZ-171 or RAL-UZ-205 and so ECNZ certification also meets the requirements of Credit 9.3 of the Design & As Built NZv1.0 tool.

Digital Infrastructure can no longer be claimed as an Innovation under credit 29.5 Global Sustainability in the Design & As Built NZv1.0 and v1.1 tool. Digital Infrastructure initiatives that are limited to the boundary and immediate area outside of commercial buildings is deemed as standard industry practice and therefore is no longer Innovative.  

Projects may use UWLR (Upward Waste Light Ratio) instead of (ULOR) Upward Light Output Ratio when targeting Light Pollution. An external luminaire with a UWLR not exceeding 5% may be used to demonstrate evidence as required by the requirements in Light Pollution - Light Pollution to Night Sky.

The NZGBC is aware that doors can unproportionally impact the outcome of the cost calculation for credit 20.2 Timber on some project types due to their high cost.  

Rather than use the whole cost of the doors in the calculation, the project team may determine the cost of the timber and machining and use that within the calculation.  For example, where the cost of the timber and machining makes up 30% of the total cost of the doors ($10,000) a cost of $3,000 can be used in the calculation.  Where project teams are including labour costs within their calculation the same percentage can be applied to the labour proportion.  Using the same example, if the cost of labour is $5,000 then the labour cost would be $1,500 (30% of the total) and the total cost used in the calculation would be $4,500 where labour costs are included.

If the project team wishes to use the same approach for other composite building components, a TQ should be raised.

The sound insulation between internal spaces complies with: Dw + LAeqT > X.

X = 75 except for:

                X = 60 for any partition with a door

                X = 80 for walls / partitions separating areas with elevated privacy requirements (e.g. meeting rooms, classrooms, wards, etc.)

A Technical Question may be submitted to confirm areas with elevated privacy requirements.

This new clarification on crushed concrete is related to the TQ issued on 8/22 which states: "Crushed concrete from a previous building on the same site directly reused (without being taken out from the site) for hardfill or backfill may claim points under credit 22 Construction and Demolition Waste, credit 19 Life Cycle Impacts and credit 21 Sustainable Products simultaneously, but not under the innovation category. Note that the project team should ensure the quality of the crushed concrete is suitably consistent as being reused for hardfill or backfill."

Any project using the TQ above is given the following additional guidance:

Credit 21: The estimated weight or volume shall be converted to $ using backfill rates and entered as Re-used (SF 1.0) under Credit 21A using the guidance for this credit in DAB v1.1. “The cost of reused products/materials shall be entered as the replacement cost for a new product/material with the same characteristics”.

For a Design Review submission, an external peer review is optional for the LCA conducted, noting that the LCA must be externally peer reviewed at the As Built stage. 

Any changes/mistakes that are corrected at the As Built stage must be highlighted by the peer reviewer, to give the Certified Assessor greater understanding of the differences between the LCA submission for the Design Review and As Built stages.

It is to be noted that outcome of the Design Review stages will not necessarily reflect the outcome at As Built for the LCA credit. Deferring the Peer Review to the As Built stage is acknowledged to be of greater risk to the project's final results.

The submission is to include any relevant extracts from the specification that demonstrate that an External Peer Review is to be completed at As Built.  

For criterion 12.2 Glare Reduction, the nominated area is primary and secondary spaces; for criteria 12.2 Daylight and 12.3 Views, the nominated area is all primary spaces.

Please see the ‘List of areas’ section of the Submission Guidelines for space type definitions.