Comprehensive Report: BREEAM Assessment of 20 ROPEMARKER STREET

This report provides a comprehensive BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) assessment of 20 ROPEMARKER STREET, a 27-story building in the UK. The assessment covers various aspects, including management, water use, energy, materials, transport, innovation, pollution, and health and well-being. The initial project credit target was set at 'Excellent,' translating to 77.28%. The report details the projected credits versus actual achievements, highlighting strengths and weaknesses in areas such as pollution control (refrigerant impact, NOx emissions), flood risk management, and land use/ecology. The assessment process followed BREEAM's three main stages: Pre-Assessment, Design Stage Assessment, and Post Construction Review. The report reflects on the assessment process and evaluates the building's performance, suggesting improvements for earning more efficient credits, particularly in areas like refrigerant leak detection and ecological protection.

Report on Building Assessment 1
Report on Building Assessment
Name of the Student:
Academic Affiliation:
Date:

Report on Building Assessment 2
Introduction
Building Assessment
A building assessment has been defined as being a quantitative performance that can be
put in usage as one attempts to evaluate prevailing constructions or fresh structure designs. The
assessment usually cover features of a building such as site in terms of drainage, paving,
Topography, retaining walls, curbing, and lighting, Windows and Walls generally termed as
building envelope, Structural, Interior Features like hallways, Stairways and common areas,
Roofing Systems, Mechanical Systems which encompass Heating, Air Conditioning and
Ventilation, Plumbing Electrical Systems, Elevators and escalators, Life Safety, Air Quality and
so many others (Lessard et al, 2017). There are diverse methods for assessing buildings like
namely BREEAM, LEED, CASBEE, GREEN STAR and HK-BEAM. What distinguishes one
specific method from another is its rating, multi-criteria and decision-making methods. The
evaluation machinery or assessment technique is usually put in place by building professionals
who consider generic features of structures while on the other hand assessment standards are
either quantitatively or qualitatively interpreted so as to simplify the usage of the assessment
process.
BREEAM
Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method abbreviated as
BREEAM is an international, charitable Green Building Rating system based in UK and is
commissioned to gauging how buildings perform in their environment (Ding et al, 2018).This
outstanding system has functioned as a point of reference for numerous green building
certification systems. It known to have been the earliest building rating system to be founded and
has been in operation since 1990 in countries like the UK, EFTA member states, EU as well as

Report on Building Assessment 3
EU candidates, not forgetting the Persian Gulf. Because of its prolonged existence, its practice is
extensive and its qualifications extremely acknowledged. BREEAM ratings are known to come
in handy for numerous governmental organizations all over these countries.
There are presently not less than one hundred thousand buildings courtesy of BREEAM
rating criterion. BREEAM scores a variety of attributes as a rating system which grants credits
for groups such as management, material together with waste, energy, internal environment
pollution, water use and transport. This goes without mentioning that it’s the only rating system
that has so far has managed to assess all these categories .Not to forget is BREEAM’s stipulation
that projects must be licensed within a period of five years upon attaining registration permit.
The assessment procedure covers a wide range of issues pertaining to the environment in the
attempt to issue rating of the building (Preiser, Hardy & Schramm, 2018). The building’s
performance in the environment can be passing, good, excellent, or outstanding. BREEAM in its
event of assessment, renowned processes of building performance are applied, which are set
alongside reputable standards, to assess a structure’s description, design, and construction as well
as usage. The procedures stand for a number of groups and standards which are ecological and
cover energetic.
BREEAM IN ACTION
In this report, BREEAM‘s standards and way of building assessment were used to
evaluate, assess, describe and reflect on the assessment process of 20 ROPEMARKER STREET.
The building construction was put under Hilson Moran an appointee of Mannford Properties
limited and Great Elm Assets Limited as an applicant (Chong, Lee & Wang, 2017). To
participate in the construction work aside the main contractor Hilson Moron Sustainability are
MAKE Architects, CORE, Waterman, WT Partnership, and Quatro. The 2014 construction is to

Report on Building Assessment 4
be a Shell and core, meaning the contractor built the base of the building -the shell and core, and
left the final equipment’s such as decoration and fitments to be done by tenants as per their own
requirements upon occupation of the building (Esteves, Dean & Balzarova, 2017). The
construction work included putting down and Redevelopment of structures to obtain a 27 storey,
and more three underground room levels, building with office usage. The building was also
scheduled to house floors for retail purposes.
Projected Credits
The assessment and crediting was done with a focus on factors such as:
Management, Water use, Energy, Materials, Transport, Innovation, Pollution, Health and well
being. Indoor quality of the environment, Energy and Material are fundamental categories in the
assessment. The projected credit was set by the client to be excellent which translated to 77.28%.
The credits projected in this building work totaled to 82 points out of 122 available points
(Shamseldin, 2017). Management obtained the highest score of 17 points followed by energy
with 14 points. Materials, pollution, land use as well as health and wellbeing and ecology scored
similar credits of 8 points. The least rated was innovation with 1 credit point as shown in the
table below:

Report on Building Assessment 5
Credits Available Targeted
MANAGEMENT 18 17
HEALTH & WELLBEING 10 8
ENERGY 21 14
TRANSPORT 9 9
WATER 9 8
MATERIALS 13 8
WASTE 9 6
LAND USE AND
ECOLOGY
10 8
POLLUTION 13 8
INNOVATION 10 1
Total 122 87
Final Weighted Score 77.28%
Predicted BREEAM
Rating
Excellent
Actual Crediting
Final Weighted Score 77.28%
Predicted BREEAM Rating Excellent

Report on Building Assessment 6
This outcome correlates with the project credit of the building. Thus it is evident that the team
responsible for the construction of 20 Ropemaker Street made right approximations and or
assumptions.
COMMISSIONING OF BREEAM PROCESS
The assessment procedure of BREEAM honored credits in conditions of providing
enough proof that illustrated fulfillment of BREEAM’s necessities. In the course of BREEAM’s
assessment process, the development’s performance in question was scrutinized over a variety of
topics. This has always been what sets BREEAM apart from the rest (Tam et al, 2017). The
topics were weighted as per their prominence thus to say some credits in some categories carried
more weight than others. In attempt to standardize the Assessment procedure of BREEAM, there
were credits with a number of binding least performance necessities that were made common
through all building minimum performance standards for the BREEAM. Other credits were
tradable thus giving the design crew the elasticity to decide which credits to target so as to
realize a specific rating. The rations of single credits differed significantly.
The assessment process of BREEAM was split into three main stages; Pre-Assessment,
Design Stage Assessment and Post Construction Review respectively. The first stage permits the
design team to establish the probable BREEAM score and rating a construction work can attain
as well as to provide a tactic for the credits to be targeted and to maintain the far ahead stages of
the assessment process (Faulconbridge, Cass & Connaughton, 2017). The second stage which is
Design Stage assesses buildings according to the strategy of the first stage, the pre-assessment
and is commenced no sooner the tender or work on site kicks off. At this stage, it is demanded
that the design is adequately comprehensive to show that all of the directed credit necessities

Report on Building Assessment 7
have been achieved. Upon completion of the assessment under design stage, the findings could
though optional be availed to the BRE to as to be given an interim certification.
The Post Construction Review, being the last part of the process was intended to
authenticate that the pledges made at the final stage of design category have been affected. The
doing of the construction work in this post construction review decreed the actual score and rated
the building attained (He et al, 2017). The evidence handed in by the design team plainly showed
a non-technical person that credit necessities had been met. In so some case as demanded
approval accounts quoted important credit criteria established that the requirements had been
met.
BUILDING EVALUATION
In the evaluation of a building, strengths and weaknesses of the building in this case
study, 20 Rope Maker Street, are to be examined. The examination will look at how the social,
economic, and institutional aspects are accounted for in both assessment and construction
(design) processes. Under pollution the building has covered, Impact of refrigerants with a
confirmation that there is not to be refrigerants in the building (Lu et al, 2017). However,
exceptions with conditions are also available in cases in which refrigeration systems containing
ammonia are installed, compliance with the Institute of Refrigeration, Ammonia Refrigeration
Systems Code of Practice, details of the refrigeration systems to be installed such as refrigerant
type are mandatory to be availed.
Also, covered under this category of pollution is Global Warming Potential of the
specified system refrigerants as per the systems Charge in kilograms as well as the Cooling
capacity in kilowatts. Other aspects of the refrigerants include; Release factors as per the sector
like Yearly refrigerant trickle ratio associated with the refrigerant charge in percentage, Yearly

Report on Building Assessment 8
purge release also results from refrigerant charge, Yearly service release for catastrophic system
failure and finally under sectorial factors is Recovery efficiency. Installed refrigerants are
required to have an eternal automatic refrigerant leak detection system put in place or an innate
automatic diagnostic technique for sensing leakage is mounted. In every occasion, a strong and
verified refrigerant trickle discovery structure need to be mounted and require to be in position of
continuously checking for leakages (Saieg et al, 2018). The system need to be able to robotically
sequester and stabilize the rest of the refrigerant(s) charge in reply to a leak recognition
occurrence. All these attempts are subjective considerations so as to earn the building more
credits.
No emissions from the boilers are found with available manufacturers’ product
information confirming on the same Dry NOx emissions at 0% O2 for space and water heating
are the attained and credited aspects. There has been confirmed avoidance of Heat pumps fueled
by grid electrical energy which likely yields radiation proportions greater than those essential by
BREEAM indirectly as well as District heating systems that incinerate waste. Biomass systems
were recognized as lowering the effect of fossil fuel exhaustion, by commissioning a renewable
fuel but were not applied since it can produce a significant amount of NOx (Mustapha, Manan &
Alwi, 2017).
Flood Risk Assessment was covered to determine the flood zone of the site and detail the
flood risk from: Fluvial, Tidal, Surface water, Sheet run-off from adjacent land; Groundwater-
Most common in low-lying areas underlain by permeable rock; Sewers- Combined, foul or
surface water sewers:-Reservoirs, canals and other artificial sources. In conclusion, as far as
flood risk management is conserved the site has low annual probability of flooding. This was
ascertained through the making of ground level of the construction and contact to both the

Report on Building Assessment 9
building and the location, are planned so as to be not less than six hundred millimeters high than
the design flood level of the flood zone in which the evaluated construction work is situated.
Under land use and ecology, the building met the following BREEAM’s standards,
previously occupied land was marked and illustrated through drawings, report or site
photographs confirmed the type and duration of previous land use. It was confirmed that actually
seventy five percent of the Suggested Development’s footprint was on land which has hitherto
been housing industrial, commercial, domestic buildings and fixed surface infrastructure.
Contamination of site was investigated by a Land Specialist who provided a replica of the
contaminated land report and drawings that showed the location of contamination and the areas
to be remediated in relation to the Proposed Development (Arvizu-Piña & Burgos, 2017).
Ecological significance of site and safety of biological features was allocated by Waterman
Ecology CORE/ Principal Contractor who provided a completed and signed copy of the
BREEAM worksheet for describing land of insignificant ecological use. Thus as per the report,
the building was erected on land of low ecological value. Protection of ecological feature was
emphasized through the putting up of the ecological protection before any preliminary activities
were done.
Minimizing impact on existing site ecology, Change in ecological value, Enhancing site
ecology, Long term impact on biodiversity are other aspects that never escaped consideration
On the category of waste, the following were addressed and implemented in the final building
outcome (Parkinson et al, 2018). Construction resource efficiency was achieved through; Setting
and reporting in contradiction of waste decrease targets, Designing for standardization of
constituents, evade waste from excavation or ground works and instead contemplate prospects

Report on Building Assessment 10
for nil cut and fill, bring back packaging for recycle, Deliberate public reuse of extra or off-cuts
which comprise of unwanted minimization initiatives and targets in tenders or contracts.
Recycled aggregates was put under Environmental Principal Contractor who provided the
percentage of recycled aggregate to contribute to the total use by complying with the minimum
levels of high grade aggregate specified. Speculative floor, ceiling finishes, operational waste,
adaptation to climate adjustment, Thermal Comfort, Reduction of energy use and carbon
emissions, Water consumption, Functional adaptability are other considerations that were
worked on in the construction (Zanni, Soetanto & Ruikar, 2017). Materials used in the
construction work were evaluated so as to meet the BREEAM’s qualifications and requirements.
The evaluation was categorized under the following:
Life cycle impacts in which provision of Green Guide specification clauses, detail
drawings and a materials schedule clearly highlighting the materials to be used in the building
was met. The materials in the question covered; External Walls, Roof, Windows, Floor finishes.
Hard landscaping together with boundary protection in which A or A+ Green Guide rating
drawings containing; detailed account of every relevant element including its component
materials, Locations in addition to area in meters square of every relevant element, Green Guide
element numbers for the applicable materials, Responsible sourcing of materials with not less
than 80% of the materials that was used were responsibly sourced (Lützkendorf, 2017).
Insulation materials as provided in drawings and manufacturers’ literature of the insulation
specified for the following areas: External walls, Groundfloor, Roof, Building services,
Thickness, Density, Thermal conductivity. Water requirements of the building were grouped as
follows and thus assuring enough and clean water.

Report on Building Assessment 11
Water consumption; the list of water consuming components met were as follows:
Urinals, Taps, Showers, Baths, Dishwashers, Washing. All these had specified flow rate and
flush volumes of consuming water fittings in the building. Water leak detection systems that are
automated, flow control devices e.g. automatic time switch device, volume controller, central
control unit were also incorporated in the building (Li et al, 2017). Others included: Water
efficient equipment like irrigation, vehicle wash plant, Transport channels within the building
premises and cost including those involved in the construction process were outlined as follows
Public transport accessibility information and a scaled map showed the distance to the public
transport nodes in terms of distance in meters and types starting from the chief building entry to
each compliant building transport knot (El-Hameed, Mansour & Faggal, 2017). Available nodes
are rail at a distance of hundred meters and bus at six hundred and fifty meters. Also included
were pedestrian routes leading to this public transport terminals. Proximity to facilities provided
was in the form of food outlets, cash outlets, recreation for fitness or sport. Community facility,
pharmacy, Cyclist facilities, Travel plan included sustainable modes of transportation and
movement of goods as well as people during the structure's set-up and usage.
Management was categorized as under the sub-topics as below: Project brief and design
where the stakeholder consultation provided meeting minutes, responsibilities schedules and
employers requirements having met to pinpoint and explain their roles, contributions and
accountabilities for every key stages of development delivery (Huo, Ann & Wu, 2017).
Stakeholder consultation -Provided meeting minutes and a consultation plan that demonstrated
all third party stakeholders having been consulted with prior to completion of the Concept
Design stage .Provision of appropriate internal and external facilities .Sustainability ,Elemental
life cycle cost ,Component level, Capital cost reporting ,Environmental management ,Monitoring

Report on Building Assessment 12
of construction site impacts, Utility consumption - Energy and ,Transport of construction
materials and waste, Commissioning and handover were other sections that earned the building
extra credits (Saieg et al, 2018). Health and wellbeing as a category entailed the following
sections when assessed alongside BREEAM’s standards, the building scored high and termed a
success (Bernardi et al, 2017). The category covered; Day lighting in which an average daylight
factor of two percent over eighty percent of the occupied spaces and at least eighty percent of the
room has a view of sky from desk or table top height. The relevant building areas such
workstations and desks are within 7m of a wall with a window that provides a permanent
opening for adequate view out. An adequate view out in this case refers a view of buildings or
landscape at eye level while one seats. There is high glazing thus sufficient view out of 95% of
the workstation places (Allen, 2017).
Ventilation for fresh air rates into the building e.g. for offices are 12 litres per second
per ,air intakes and exhausts located ten meters apart with intakes being twenty meters from
springs of external pollution such as roads, car parks, loading. Thermal comfort was also given a
priority in the building work with both summer and winter operative temperature ranges.
Acoustic performance (Internal indoor ambient noise levels), Safety and security- pedestrian and
cyclist routes on site. Energy requirements and performance in the building in general is a key
factor when it comes to BREEAM assessment standards (Tan et al, 2017).
20 Rope Maker Street can be evaluated on the basis of having reduced energy usage and
emissions of carbon in nature which are toxic to the environment. Zero net regulated carbon (ii)
oxide emissions, Energy monitoring, Sub-metering of high energy load and tenancy areas with
installed meters on the energy supply to every single tenanted unit, External Lighting with
luminous efficacy of external light fittings of not less than sixty lamp lumen per circuit watt.

Report on Building Assessment 13
Free Cooling which include Night time, cooling, Ground coupled air cooling Displacement
ventilation, absorption cooling, using waste heat (Wallhagen, Malmqvist & Eriksson, 2017).
Credit and rating wise, 20 Ropemaker street is an excellent building with features that not only
meet BREEAM’s standard but also takes into consideration the upcoming environmental issues
such as global warming, nanotechnologies that lead to toxicity, physical impacts and increased
biodiversity, increased fire risks, increased demand to biofuel as well as biomass, dramatic
changes in water flows and nature conservation policies (Shen et al, 2017).
SUGGESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS
Although 20 Ropemaker Street is rated as Excellent after meeting a high number of
BREEAM’s standards, the total number of credits obtained as compared to the ones available, it
is evident that the building process facilitators or contractors did not do their best. A good
example of this can be illustrated in at innovation level where they scored only one point among
the ten available points (Allen et al, 2017). Also another weakness can be identified at the energy
level although from the outlook scoring fourteen points is considerably good work; they could
have done better since they had a big room of seven points (MacNaughton, et al, 2017). To earn
more points building contractors require to attain standard performance gages well-defined in a
prevailing BREEAM matter for example exploiting outside the typical BREEAM valuation
criteria and thus Grade A practice.
Conclusion
The report on assessment of 20 Ropemaker Street as per BREEAM’s standards and
qualifications covered the building assessment in general and BREEAM as a number one
assessment system (Caiado et al, 2018). Likewise rating as per credit categories and reflection on
the assessment process has been covered. In conclusion, BREEAM is a classic rating system and

Report on Building Assessment 14
20 Rope Maker Street is a building displaying modern building standards that should be adopted
by future construction works.

Report on Building Assessment 15
References
Arvizu-Piña, V.A. and Burgos, A.C., 2017. Promoting sustainability in Mexico’s building sector
via environmental product declarations. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,
22(11), pp.1744-1759.
Bernardi, E., Carlucci, S., Cornaro, C. and Bohne, R.A., 2017. An Analysis of the Most Adopted
Rating Systems for Assessing the Environmental Impact of Buildings. Sustainability, 9(7),
p.1226.
Chong, H.Y., Lee, C.Y. and Wang, X., 2017. A mixed review of the adoption of Building
Information Modelling (BIM) for sustainability. Journal of cleaner production, 142, pp.4114-
4126.
Ding, Z., Fan, Z., Tam, V.W., Bian, Y., Li, S., Illankoon, I.C.S. and Moon, S., 2018. Green
building evaluation system implementation. Building and Environment, 133, pp.32-40.
El-Hameed, A.A., Mansour, Y. and Faggal, A., 2017. Water-Efficient Construction Practices for
Housing Projects in Egypt: A Review of Literature. In International Conference for Sustainable
Design of the Built Environment-SDBE London (p. 1125).
Esteves, M.C., Dean, D. and Balzarova, M., 2017. Assessment of building products attributes—
A comparative study between eco-labelled and non-eco-labelled products available in the New
Zealand market. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 10, pp.100-109.
Faulconbridge, J., Cass, N. and Connaughton, J., 2017. How market standards affect building
design: The case of low energy design in commercial offices. Environment and Planning A:
Economy and Space, p.0308518X17752681.
He, B., Han, Y., Zhao, L. and Shen, L., 2017. A Comparison Study on the Green Building
Performance Assessment Tools for Promoting Sustainable Construction. In Proceedings of the

Report on Building Assessment 16
20th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate
(pp. 1169-1184). Springer, Singapore.
Huo, X., Ann, T.W. and Wu, Z., 2017. A comparative analysis of site planning and design
among green building rating tools. Journal of cleaner production, 147, pp.352-359.
Lessard, Y., Anand, C., Blanchet, P., Frenette, C. and Amor, B., 2017. LEED v4: where are we
now? Critical assessment through the LCA of an office building using a low impact energy
consumption mix. Journal of Industrial Ecology.
Li, Y., Chen, X., Wang, X., Xu, Y. and Chen, P.H., 2017. A review of studies on green building
assessment methods by comparative analysis. Energy and Buildings, 146, pp.152-159.
Liu, Z., Chen, K., Peh, L. and Tan, K.W., 2017. A feasibility study of Building Information
Modeling for Green Mark New Non-Residential Building (NRB): 2015 analysis. Energy
Procedia, 143, pp.80-87.
Lu, Y., Wu, Z., Chang, R. and Li, Y., 2017. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for green
buildings: A critical review and future directions. Automation in Construction, 83, pp.134-148.
Lützkendorf, T., 2017. Assessing the environmental performance of buildings: trends, lessons
and tensions. Building Research & Information, pp.1-21.
MacNaughton, P., Satish, U., Laurent, J.G.C., Flanigan, S., Vallarino, J., Coull, B., Spengler,
J.D. and Allen, J.G., 2017. The impact of working in a green certified building on cognitive
function and health. Building and environment, 114, pp.178-186.
Mustapha, M.A., Manan, Z.A. and Alwi, S.R.W., 2017. Sustainable Green Management System
(SGMS)–An integrated approach towards organisational sustainability. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 146, pp.158-172.

Report on Building Assessment 17
Parkinson, A.T., Reid, R., McKerrow, H. and Wright, D., 2018. Evaluating positivist theories of
occupant satisfaction: a statistical analysis. Building Research & Information, F46(4), pp.430-
443.
Preiser, W.F., Hardy, A.E. and Schramm, U., 2018. From Linear Delivery Process to Life Cycle
Phases: The Validity of the Concept of Building Performance Evaluation. In Building
Performance Evaluation (pp. 3-18). Springer, Cham.
Saieg, P., Sotelino, E.D., Nascimento, D. and Caiado, R.G.G., 2018. Interactions of building
information modeling, lean and sustainability on the architectural, engineering and construction
industry: a systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, pp.788-806.
Shamseldin, A.K.M., 2017. Compatibility of global environmental assessment methods of
buildings with an Egyptian energy code. HBRC Journal, 13(1), pp.72-82.
Shrubsole, C., Hamilton, I.G., Zimmermann, N., Papachristos, G., Broyd, T., Burman, E.,
Mumovic, D., Zhu, Y., Lin, B. and Davies, M., 2018. Bridging the gap: The need for a systems
thinking approach in understanding and addressing energy and environmental performance in
buildings. Indoor and Built Environment, p.1420326X17753513.
Tam, V.W., Le, K.N., Tran, C.N., Wang, X. and Wang, J., 2017. A review of international green
building designs. International Journal of Construction Project Management, 9(1), pp.3-18.
Wallhagen, M., Malmqvist, T. and Eriksson, O., 2017. Professionals’ knowledge and use of
environmental assessment in an architectural competition. Building Research & Information,
45(4), pp.426-442.
Zanni, M.A., Soetanto, R. and Ruikar, K., 2017. Towards a BIM-enabled sustainable building
design process: roles, responsibilities, and requirements. Architectural Engineering and Design
Management, 13(2), pp.101-129.

Report on Building Assessment 18