Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment for …...INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO - CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT CASE STUDY June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 ii which shows the

June 22, 2012

CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO

Case Study Report

REPO

RT

Report Number: 1111510039

Submitted to: Infrastructure Ontario 1 Dundas Street West, 22nd Floor Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2L5

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO - CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT CASE STUDY

June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Golder Associates, with Morrison Hershfield (the Consultants), have performed a Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment study in alignment with the protocol developed by the Public Infrastructure Engineering Vulnerability Committee (PIEVC), for Infrastructure Ontario (IO). This study brought together experts in building systems engineering, energy, water, climate, cultural heritage and other key disciplines, who worked with IO’s project team, facility stakeholders, Engineers Canada and Environment Canada, to complete this vulnerability assessment.

The study focused on three buildings in IO’s portfolio, located in the South-West region of Ontario. The three buildings that were the focus of the study contrast in age and building type and were selected to be representative of the variety of facilities in the larger IO portfolio. The selected buildings are:

The Garden City Tower, located at 301 St. Paul Street in St. Catharines, Ontario;

The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Southwest Regional Headquarters, located at 6355 Westminster Drive in London, Ontario; and

The Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry, which form a historical complex located at 105 Market Street and 50-70 Wellington Street, Brantford, Ontario.

The objectives of the assessment were to:

Identify the changes in key climate parameters that could affect IO’s facilities;

Identify building components that are at risk of failure, damage and/or deterioration from more frequent severe weather events or significant changes to baseline climate design values;

Perform a vulnerability assessment on three (3) buildings using the PIEVC protocol, including:

Estimating the probability of significant climate events affecting infrastructure;

Estimating the effect of significant climate events affecting infrastructure;

Facilitating a vulnerability assessment workshop incorporating subject matter experts, IO and CBRE staff, the Project Advisory Committee and other stakeholders, in order to quantify the risk from identified events;

Make recommendations on what remedial action may be necessary to respond to climate change risks to the facilities;

Assess Ontario’s building code requirements and make recommendations on possible revisions to code which would reduce climate vulnerability; and

Document and present the findings in the form of case studies which can be used to inform decision makers and other stakeholders within ORC, PIEVC and the Government of Ontario.

The PIEVC protocol is based on a structured risk-assessment process, facilitated by a cohesive team of subject matter experts working closely with the client organization and its stakeholders. In order to complete the probability assessment required by the PIEVC protocol, a local climate and weather data set was prepared


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 ii

which shows the historical climate that the buildings have been exposed to and assesses the future climatic changes that may occur over the study periods. Specific climate parameters were used to identify trends in broader climate event categories, which were then used as part of the workshop to assess the probability of climate infrastructure interactions in the future.

Using the data gathered during site visits and through a review of building drawings, condition assessments and other information, a framework for the vulnerability assessment was created based on the matrix template provided in the PIEVC protocol. The objective of the matrix was to form the basis for the climate change vulnerability workshop and to guide workshop participants in identifying and assessing potential climate-infrastructure interactions.

The purpose of the workshop was to discuss the probability and consequence of climate events affecting the infrastructure. Probability refers to the likelihood of the event happening based on weather and climate. Consequence refers to the impacts from the climate infrastructure interaction.

During the workshop, each building was assessed by a different group of 5-6 participants. Each group was moderated by a member of the consulting team, and additional team members were available to provide advice to each of the groups.

The overall results reveal some of the differences in scoring between the three facilities. The St. Catharines site had the highest range of scores and was the only facility that identified high-risk interactions. The London site identified very few medium and no high scores, but had a large number of low risk interactions. Brantford identified an almost equal amount of low and medium risk interactions. The overall results are presented in the following table and chart.

Overall Scoring Results Distribution Site Low Medium High

St. Catharines 39 36 2 London 58 3 0 Brantford 29 28 0

Summary of Recommendations As a result of the analysis undertaken in this case study, a number of conclusions and recommendations have been made. These are summarized under the following categories:

Recommendations to address identified vulnerabilities in each of the buildings;

Recommendations for the PIEVC protocol and process; and

Building Code comments.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 iii

Recommendations to address identified vulnerabilities St. Catharines – Garden City Tower

Recommendation Category

Recommendation Timeframe

Management Action Maintain accurate log of thermal comfort complaints.

Maintain accurate log of water penetration events, and failed insulated glazing locations.

Commission a review of the curtain wall system to determine air leakage pathways and drainage capabilities.

Investigate strategies for reducing solar gain from curtain wall.

Current emergency plans and redundancy should be assessed for effectiveness.

Ensure that regular maintenance efforts address all high and medium vulnerability systems identified in this report and include documentation of regular inspections.

Ongoing, beginning immediately


6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

Re-engineering & retrofit Replace flat roof sections. Employ proper

design and use qualified trades with adequate quality assurance.

A full re-commissioning of the building upgrades of the chillers to meet 100% load requirements should be undertaken.

Rebalance the Building Air Distribution Systems, especially those serving areas experiencing thermal comfort issues.

Check fastening details on metal panels for adequacy under high winds, and for corrosion protection.

Investigate risk to on-site transformer and electrical systems from extreme temperatures, including potential system to monitor transformer core temperature and system redundancy.

Ensure sprinkler system compressed air source is dry. Dry compressed air will reduce chances for freeze failures due to freezing of condensation within the system.

Develop an on-site storm water management plan to control outflow to the public sewers.

Drought-resistant species should be used in landscaping as precautionary measure and to reduce need for irrigation.

6 months to 2 years

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

1 to 2 years

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 iv

London – OPP SW Regional Headquarters



Management Action Maintain accurate log of thermal comfort complaints.

Maintain accurate log of water penetration events and locations.

Implement ongoing commissioning process to ensure that equipment continues to perform as required.

Keep up with review and maintenance of high and medium vulnerability systems identified in this report to limit degradation due to aging and schedule component replacement promptly when required.

Investigate opportunities to improve redundancy in the potable water supply and sanitary sewage handling systems.





Next 1-3 Years

Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry Office



Management Action Review facility assessment and restoration protocols and frequency, particularly for infrastructure components with medium risk.

Implement backup redundancy for critical systems. Ensure regular maintenance and inspection to areas which could allow water ingress.

Conduct condition assessment of detention cell and jail windows and glazing, and develop associated renewal plan.

Maintain regular review of timber elements for early identification of insect infestation or moisture damage.

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year


Re-engineering & retrofit Further investigation into courthouse building’s foundation wall potential issues should be prioritized to mitigate ongoing risk.

Continue periodic re-pointing and isolated brick and stone replacement to mitigate potential water penetration;

1 to 2 years, or sooner if water penetration observed within basement areas of courthouse.



June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 v



repair and replacement cycles might increase in frequency over time.

Drought-resistant species should be used as precautionary measure and to reduce need for irrigation.

Higher trends for temperature and humidity levels should be integrated into design considerations when cooling systems are eventually replaced.

Use roofing consultant to design repairs and qualified roofing contractors to execute the work. Quality assurance during construction is essential.

6 months to 1 year

End of equipment life

End of component/system life

Recommendations for the PIEVC protocol and process 1) Quantifying climatic loads and infrastructure capacities in order to determine vulnerability and/or adaptive

capacity is a significant challenge. It is recommended that additional guidance to develop a better ‘qualitative’ option be included in the protocol to be used when it is not possible to assess these values ‘numerically’.

2) The PIEVC protocol is intended to apply to a range of public infrastructure, and therefore provides a general framework which can be customized to various different engagements. While the protocol should remain general enough to apply to this wide range of projects, it is suggested that “good practice guidance” be developed with respect to various elements to help project teams determine the most effective methods. Some suggested elements to be included are provided in Section 6 of this report.

3) The PIEVC protocol should contain additional guidance on high consequence but low probability climate infrastructure interactions, such as tornadoes and hurricanes, and their related importance with regard to other climate infrastructure interactions.

4) Remove the probability assessment of zero from the probability scale.

5) Make the PIEVC protocol publicly available or provide to proponents during the RFP stage so that efforts can be estimated accurately and methodology can be refined up-front.

Building Code comments 1) Hurricane survivability is addressed in building codes for some jurisdictions in the United States of America

and the Caribbean. Current losses in Canada as a result of this type of weather are minimal, however if a higher frequency of extreme thunder storms and hurricanes is expected in Ontario, a review of the Ontario Building Code’s ability to address the survivability of our buildings in such events should be conducted.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 vi

2) Provincial and National Building Codes that currently contain provisions for energy conservation would have to track future climate trends to allow them to adapt to the forecasted changes in temperature extremes. In Ontario for example, the trend is for greater temperatures. The Ontario Building Code is one of the Provincial codes that specifically consider energy use reduction (OBC 2006 SB-10 Supplement, which came into force on January 1, 2012). Code officials would need to maintain the provisions in the Code so that minimal building performance does not fall behind energy reduction targets.

3) Under higher outdoor temperature conditions, more energy will be required to cool buildings. To maintain current and future energy reduction targets, current standards governing thermal comfort (i.e. ASHRAE Standard 55) may have to be modified. For example, the ability to permit higher indoor summer conditions and lower indoor winter conditions can lead to substantial energy savings.

4) Performance criteria for moisture management that are incorporated into building codes (e.g., CSA A440) should be updated to accommodate expected greater rainfall and expected higher frequency of extreme rain events. Current air leakage, wind resistance, and water penetration ratings may need to be re-evaluated.

5) User-prepared standards and guidelines would have to be maintained and potentially upgraded using forecasted trends for climate change, and coordinated with the management actions recommendations listed in the above tables.

6) Although not specifically addressed as part of this current study, changing climates may lead to a change in invasive and potentially damaging insect species. Changing climates may mean greater exposure to these species that can have a significant impact on buildings that were not designed to mitigate these concerns. An increased focus on protecting buildings in some jurisdictions may be required.

7) Municipal governments currently will often regulate storm water management, Current standards may have to be altered to allow for an increased extreme rain event or for greater overall expected rainfall. Strategies such as storage, diversion, or retention may have to play a larger role.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 vii

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 PIEVC PROCESS ............................................................................................................................................................. 3

3.0 DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 6

3.1 Climate Factors .................................................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Climate Parameters and Indices .......................................................................................................................... 6

3.3 Data Sufficiency and Quality ................................................................................................................................ 8

3.3.1 Sources of Climate Data ................................................................................................................................ 8

3.4 Buildings Assessment .......................................................................................................................................... 9

3.4.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 12

3.4.2 Garden City Tower ....................................................................................................................................... 12

3.4.2.1 Roofs ........................................................................................................................................................ 12

3.4.2.2 Windows ................................................................................................................................................... 14

3.4.2.3 Cladding and Insulation ............................................................................................................................ 14

3.4.2.4 Weather Sealing ....................................................................................................................................... 14

3.4.2.5 Structural Components ............................................................................................................................. 15

3.4.2.6 Exterior Elements ..................................................................................................................................... 15

3.4.2.7 Mechanical Systems ................................................................................................................................. 16

3.4.2.8 Electrical Systems .................................................................................................................................... 17

3.4.2.9 Water and wastewater handling systems ................................................................................................. 17

3.4.2.10 Planning and Renewal .............................................................................................................................. 17

3.4.2.11 Known Condition and Performance Issues ............................................................................................... 17

3.4.2.12 Data Sufficiency and Quality ..................................................................................................................... 17

3.4.3 Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry ....................................................................................... 17

3.4.3.1 Roofs ........................................................................................................................................................ 17

3.4.3.2 Windows ................................................................................................................................................... 19


3.4.3.4 Weather Sealing ....................................................................................................................................... 19

3.4.3.5 Structural Components ............................................................................................................................. 20


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 viii



3.4.3.8 Water and Wastewater Handling Systems ............................................................................................... 22



3.4.3.11 Cultural Heritage ....................................................................................................................................... 22

3.4.3.12 Data Sufficiency and Quality ..................................................................................................................... 23

3.4.4 OPP Southwest Regional Headquarters ...................................................................................................... 23

3.4.4.1 Roofs ........................................................................................................................................................ 23

3.4.4.2 Windows ................................................................................................................................................... 23


3.4.4.4 Weather Sealing ....................................................................................................................................... 23

3.4.4.5 Structural .................................................................................................................................................. 24

3.4.4.6 Exterior Elements ..................................................................................................................................... 24



3.4.4.9 Water and Wastewater Handling Systems ............................................................................................... 26



3.4.4.12 Data Sufficiency ........................................................................................................................................ 26

3.5 Applicable Performance Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 26

3.5.1 Performance Factors and Responses .......................................................................................................... 27

3.5.2 Identification of Possible Interactions ........................................................................................................... 27

4.0 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................. 30

4.1 Workshop Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 30

4.1.1 Climate-Infrastructure Assessment Matrix ................................................................................................... 30

4.1.2 Probability Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 31

4.2 Vulnerability Assessment Workshop .................................................................................................................. 32

4.2.1 Probability scoring results ............................................................................................................................ 33

4.2.2 Severity Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 33

4.3 Vulnerability Scoring Results ............................................................................................................................. 34


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 ix

4.3.1 Overall Results ............................................................................................................................................. 34

4.3.2 Low Risks ..................................................................................................................................................... 36

4.3.3 High and Medium Risks ............................................................................................................................... 39

5.0 BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 42

5.1 St. Catharines – Garden City Tower .................................................................................................................. 43

5.2 London – OPP SW Region Headquarters ......................................................................................................... 47

5.3 Brantford – Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry ................................................................................................ 49

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 54

6.1 Addressing Building Vulnerability ....................................................................................................................... 54

6.1.1 Garden City Tower, St. Catharines .............................................................................................................. 55

6.1.2 OPP South-West Regional Headquarters, London ...................................................................................... 56

6.1.3 Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry ....................................................................................... 57

6.2 Project Challenges ............................................................................................................................................. 58

6.3 Recommendations for Enhancing the PIEVC Protocol and Process ................................................................. 58

6.3.1 Building Code Comments ............................................................................................................................ 59

TABLES Table 1: Overall Climate Trends ................................................................................................................................................. 7

Table 2: Building Infrastructure Components ........................................................................................................................... 12

Table 3: Performance Criteria Sources .................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 4: Performance factors and potential response .............................................................................................................. 27

Table 5: Infrastructure components and sub-components ....................................................................................................... 27

Table 7: PIEVC probability scoring scale ................................................................................................................................. 31

Table 8: PIEVC severity scoring scale ..................................................................................................................................... 33

Table 10: Overall Scoring Results Distribution ......................................................................................................................... 34

Table 11: Summary of low-risk interactions .............................................................................................................................. 36

Table 12: Summary of high and medium vulnerability infrastructure components and interactions identified .......................... 39

Table 13: Medium and high risk analysis – St. Catharines ....................................................................................................... 43

Table 14: Medium and high risk analysis – London ................................................................................................................. 47

Table 15: Medium and high risk analysis – Brantford ............................................................................................................... 49

Table 16: Recommendations for Minimizing Climate Change Vulnerability at the Garden City Tower .................................... 55


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 x

Table 17: Recommendations for Minimizing Climate Change Vulnerability at the OPP South-West Regional Headquarters........................................................................................................................................................... 56

Table 19: Current and Future Climate Indices .......................................................................................................................... 63

Table 20: Building Envelope ..................................................................................................................................................... 67

Table 21: Structural Elements .................................................................................................................................................. 69

Table 22: Mechanical and Electrical Systems .......................................................................................................................... 73

Table 23: Water and Wastewater Handling Systems ............................................................................................................... 74

Table 24: Performance criteria for infrastructure components .................................................................................................. 76

FIGURES

Figure 2: Garden City Tower, St. Catharines ........................................................................................................................... 10

Figure 3: OPP Southwest Regional Headquarters, London ..................................................................................................... 11

Figure 4: Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry, Brantford .................................................................................... 11

Figure 5: Clockwise from top left: Some water retention observed on asphalt roof, roof drains, some vegetative growth on roof ..................................................................................................................................................................... 13

Figure 6: Rooftop courtyard ...................................................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 7: Glazing systems and exterior cladding ...................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 8: Clockwise from top left: Cracking in concrete block, exterior courtyard, minor settling at street level, parking garage entrance ...................................................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 9: A variety of rooftop types are present ....................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 10: Glazing and exterior cladding .................................................................................................................................. 20

Figure 11: Clockwise from top left: Water damage on timber, rubble stone foundation, secondary roof structure, ducting in basement passageways.......................................................................................................................... 21

Figure 12: Exterior cladding, weather sealing and roof ............................................................................................................ 24

Figure 13: Drainage, landscaping, walkways and accessibility ................................................................................................ 25

Figure 16: Overall Scoring Results Distribution ........................................................................................................................ 35

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Climate Analysis

APPENDIX B Site Visit Notes

APPENDIX C Potential Climate-Infrastructure Interactions

APPENDIX D Performance Criteria

APPENDIX E Vulnerability Assessment Results


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, warming of the climate system is unequivocal and is responsible for most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid‐20th century.1

Weather extremes and climate statistics are incorporated into building standards, codes and best practice design - from extreme wind events to roof snow loads to operational loads for heating, cooling and ventilation purposes. We construct buildings to enable control of indoor environments to our advantage. They permit us to work comfortably in the dead of a Prairie winter or play indoor hockey in summer in Southern Ontario. Any engineering design requires an understanding of expected loads. Building loads are governed by local weather and intended use, and local weather is governed by climate.

Adaptation is now recognized as an essential component of the response to climate change, acknowledging that some significant adverse impacts are now unavoidable. While climate change impacts may intensify over time, some effects are already occurring and early action to manage the risks that these changing hazards pose may reduce total costs and risks.

Location, climate and intended use are fundamental in determining building design. What might be appropriate to a tropical location, may lead to severe building envelope damage in a cold climate. There are good reasons why building codes include weather data tables organized by location, and engineering bodies such as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), have created climate zones to help engineers design buildings for expected loads in their construction location.

A changing climate poses a real and significant risk to the built environment. With increasing weather variability anticipated over the next 50 years, climate change adaptation strategies are critical to long-term sustainability strategies for all organizations. The critical first step in developing these strategies is assessing climate change risk.

To develop an understanding of climate change vulnerability within IO’s portfolio, three (3), representative buildings within IO’s South-West region were assessed using the PIEVC Engineering Protocol for Climate Change Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment.

The PIEVC protocol is based on a structured risk-assessment process, facilitated by a cohesive team of subject matter experts working closely with the client organization and its stakeholders. In order to fulfill the requirements of the PIEVC process, and IOs needs, Golder Associates, along with Morrison Hershfield, brought together experts in building systems engineering, energy, water, climate, cultural heritage and other key disciplines, who worked with IO’s project team, facility stakeholders, Engineers Canada and Environment Canada, to complete this vulnerability assessment.

The objectives of the assessment were to:

Identify the changes in key climate parameters that could affect IO’s facilities;

Identify building components that are at risk of failure, damage and/or deterioration from more frequent severe weather events or significant changes to baseline climate design values;

1 IPCC 2007; Climate Change 2007: The Physical Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 976pp.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 2

Perform a vulnerability assessment on three (3) buildings using the PIEVC protocol, including:

Estimating the probability of significant climate events affecting infrastructure;

Estimating the effect of significant climate events affecting infrastructure; and

Facilitating a vulnerability assessment workshop incorporating subject matter experts, IO and CBRE staff, the Project Advisory Committee and other stakeholders, in order to quantify the risk from identified events;

Make recommendations on what remedial action may be necessary to respond to climate change risks to the facilities;

Assess Ontario’s building code requirements and make recommendations on possible revisions to code which would reduce climate vulnerability; and

Document and present the findings in the form of case studies which can be used to inform decision makers and other stakeholders within IO, PIEVC and the Government of Ontario.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 3

2.0 PIEVC PROCESS The PIEVC Engineering Protocol for Climate Change Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment (PIEVC Protocol) was developed by Engineers Canada with funding contributions from Natural Resources Canada, in order to provide a framework to support effective decision-making by owners and operators of public infrastructure to incorporate climate change adaptation into design, development and management of planned and existing infrastructure.

The protocol consists of a step-by-step process of risk assessment and engineering analysis in order to assess the impact of climate change on infrastructure and provide recommendations for adaptation strategies. The protocol relates to four main categories of infrastructure, including buildings, roads and associated structures, stormwater and wastewater treatment and collection systems, and water resource systems and other water management infrastructures.

For the purposes of this project, the analysis will be focussed on buildings only, however the building’s reliance on these other sensitive infrastructure categories will be considered in the scope of analysis.

The PIEVC Protocol outlines the following five (5) steps in the vulnerability assessment process:

Figure 1: PIEVC Vulnerability Assessment Steps

The following sections outline the project team’s general methodology for meeting the requirements of the PIEVC protocol based on each of these five steps.

Step 1 of the PIEVC protocol requires the practitioner to develop a general description of:

Step 5 Conclusions & Recommendations

Step 4 Engineering Analysis

Step 3 Risk Assessment

Step 2 Data Gathering & Sufficiency

Step 1 Project Definition


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 4

The infrastructure;

The location;

Historic climate;

Load;

Age;

Other relevant factors; and

Identify major documents and information sources.

Step 2 of the PIEVC protocol requires the practitioner to:

Identify the features of the infrastructure that will be considered in the assessment; and

Identify applicable climate information.

Step 2 requires the practitioner to exercise professional judgment based on experience and training. Step 2 is an interdisciplinary process requiring engineering, climatological, operations, maintenance, and management expertise. The practitioner must ensure that the right combination of expertise is represented either on the assessment team or through consultations with other professionals during the execution of the assessment.

Step 3 of the PIEVC protocol requires the practitioner to identify the interactions between the infrastructure, the climate and other factors that could lead to vulnerability, including:

Specific infrastructure components;

Specific climate change parameter values; and

Specific performance goals.

The practitioner, in consultation with the Project Partner, management, engineering and operation personnel, will perform a risk assessment of the infrastructure’s vulnerability to climate change. This risk assessment will:

Be based on the professional experience and judgment of the assessment team;

Identify areas of key concern; and

Identify interactions that need further evaluation.

Step 3 also requires the practitioner to make an assessment of data availability and quality, and to revisit steps 1 and 2 or identify the need for further work outside of the scope of the assessment.

In Step 3, the practitioner is required to determine:

Which interactions require additional assessment;

Where data refinement is required; and

Initial recommendations about:


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 5

New research;

Immediate remedial action; or

Non-vulnerable infrastructure.

Step 4, of the PIEVC protocol requires the practitioner to conduct an engineering analysis on the interactions identified in Step 3 as requiring further assessment.

The protocol sets out equations that direct the practitioner to assess:

The total load on the infrastructure (including current, and projected changes arising from climate and other effects); and

The total capacity of the infrastructure (including existing capacity and projected changes arising from aging, use and other factors).

Based on the difference between the total projected load and the total projected capacity, the engineering analysis will determine whether a vulnerability or adaptive capacity exists.

Step 4 also requires the practitioner to make a final assessment of data availability and quality, and to revisit steps 1 and 2 or identify the need for further work outside of the scope of the assessment.

Once the practitioner has established sufficient confidence in the results of the engineering analysis, the practitioner must decide to either:

Make recommendations based on their analysis (Step 5); or

Revisit the risk assessment process based on the new/refined data developed in the engineering analysis (Step 3).

Step 5 of the PIEVC protocol requires the practitioner to provide recommendations based on the work completed in Steps 1 through 4.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 6

3.0 DATA COLLECTION 3.1 Climate Factors Based on the climate parameters and climate data analyzed, climate factors considered to have a potential impact on building infrastructure were defined. Most climate factors are related to historical climate indicators, which provide historic trends. The future trends of the climate factors are determined using climate model projections and literature values as future climate indicators. The future climate models consist of largely qualitative data which predicts how some of these climate factors are expected to trend in the future.

The justification for the direction of each of the future climate factor trends is given in the table below (Table 1). The majority of the trends are increasing while only one trend, low temperature, is decreasing. There are also a number of climate trends that cannot currently be quantified based on the available information. If these climate factors are significant based on the risk assessment they could targeted for further research through literature review and statistical downscaling.

3.2 Climate Parameters and Indices In order to complete the probability assessment required by the PIEVC protocol, a local climate and weather data set was prepared which shows the historical climate that the buildings have been exposed to and assesses the future climatic changes that may occur over the study periods. Specific climate parameters were used to identify trends in broader climate event categories, which were then used as part of the workshop to determine the dynamics of interaction probability. The list of climate parameters and associated data sources are shown in Appendix A. The following table provides a description of the overall trends identified.

Historic Climate Parameters / Trends

Future Climate Indicators

Lay-person Description of Climate Factors


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 7

Table 1: Overall Climate Trends Event Category Climate Parameter Trends Drought Frequency of Drought No Trends Freeze-Thaw Freeze-Thaw Cycles Slight increase based increasing winter precipitation and

average temperatures Humidity High Humidity Periods Slight increase based on increasing precipitation from analysis

of all models, and increase in temperatures.

Rain Frequency of Rainfall Trend is unclear due to unknown distribution of rain events in future projections

Heavy Rain Slight increase based on higher rainfall volume in the summer season

Total Rainfall Increase of ~50 mm annually above historic baseline

Freezing Rain Slight increase in temperature will create a vertical temperature profile that is conducive to freezing rain events

Rain on Snow Events Slight increase in temperature will create a vertical temperature profile that is conducive to rain on snow events

Rain/Wind Synoptically winds are decreasing but summertime events have the potential for gustier conditions due to increase in atmospheric energy for thunderstorm events

Flash Freeze Event (Rain/Freeze-Thaw)

Trend is unclear due to unknown distribution of rain events in future projections

Snow Snow Accumulation Trend is unclear due to unknown distribution of precipitation events in future projections

Snowmelt Trend is unclear due to unknown distribution of precipitation events in future projections

Sun Sunny days Trend is unclear due to lack of information on future dynamics (cloud cover)

Temperature Extreme Heat Slight increase based on increase in average summer temperatures

Extreme Cold Slight decrease based on increase in average winter temperatures

Cooling Degree Days Slight increase based on increase in average summer temperatures

Heating Degree Days Slight decrease based on increase in average winter temperatures

Average Temperature Analysis of all models indicates and average increase of ~2.5°C above historic baseline for all three sites

Wind High Winds Slight decrease in wind speed


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 8

3.3 Data Sufficiency and Quality 3.3.1 Sources of Climate Data The climate variables examined for future projections from the GCM output include:

Mean air temperature (2m);

Total precipitation; and

Mean wind (10m).

The GCM data is available as monthly output and was analyzed for both seasonal and annual trends, as specified in Table 1.

The assessment uses data from three climate stations for describing historic climate conditions and trends. The climate stations are selected based upon the recommendations of Environment Canada’s Canadian Climate Change Scenarios Network (CCCSN) and the availability of both daily and hourly data. The CCCSN is Environment Canada’s interface for distributing climate change scenarios and adaptation research. The CCCSN also sets the guidelines on how to select the proper station to represent the region of interest and, how climate data should be used when calculating trends.

The criteria used to select the stations were based on the following selection CCCSN factors:

The length of record (minimum 30 years of data);

A continuous, homogeneous record;

Records are up to date; and

Proximity to the area of interest.

Based on the CCCSN criteria and the availability of daily and hourly data, the following three stations were chosen:

Hamilton Airport, Ontario at 43°10’18.072” N and 79°56’03.036” W with an elevation of 237.70 masl;

London International Airport, Ontario at 43°01' 59.000" N and 81°09'04.000 W with an elevation of 278.00 masl; and

St. Catharines Airport, Ontario at 43°12' 00.000" N and 79°10' 00.000" W with an elevation of 97.80 masl.

Hamilton Airport is used as a proxy for buildings in Brantford, Ontario. The Brantford station does not have hourly data available, which is necessary to analyze the wind speed and humidity trends. The Hamilton Airport station is approximately 33 km from Brantford but represents the closest station with available hourly data for the period of interest. Hourly observations in Hamilton changed from partial (daytime) observations to full 24-hour observations in November, 1999. This creates a non-homogeneous data set after this point. For this reason, the meteorological data was collected for the period from 1970 through to 1999. Daytime trends in humidity are considered qualitative, as more than 10% of the data is missing for the period. The wind speed was consistently measured on an hourly basis from 1974 onwards and can be considered quantitative (less than 10% of the data


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 9

for the period is missing). All daily data is considered quantitative as less than 10% of the data is missing for the period.

London International Airport Station represents the buildings in London, Ontario. In 2003, the station was moved 0.9 km away creating a non-homogeneous record. Daily and hourly meteorological data was collected for the period from 1971 through to 2000. Data was not collected from the new station location as there was a shift in the measurement period for local precipitation.

St. Catharines Airport Station represents the buildings in St. Catharines, Ontario. Daily and hourly meteorological data was collected for the period from 1971 through to 2000, after which the data is no longer available. The hourly data was only observed during the daytime and is missing more than 10% of the values for the chosen period. For this reason, all wind speed and humidity trends will be considered qualitative for the daytime period only. The daily data has less than 10% of the data missing for the chosen period and is considered quantitative for all climate variables studied.

3.4 Buildings Assessment The facilities analyzed in this study are all located within the South-west region of Ontario, and contrast in terms of usage, building types and age.

Garden City Tower – St. Catharines The Garden City Tower is located at 301 St. Paul Street in St. Catharines, Ontario. The building was constructed in 1996 and consists of an eleven story tower, surrounded by a low-rise section. The building has an interior courtyard area that is at the 2nd floor level. The building is predominantly used as office space for government operations including Ministry of Transportation (MTO) headquarters. A bus terminal is also part of the structure. In 2008, the building achieved BOMA BESt Level 3 certification.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 10

Figure 2: Garden City Tower, St. Catharines

OPP Southwest Regional Headquarters - London The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Southwest Regional Headquarters is located at 6355 Westminster Drive in London, Ontario. The site consists of approximately 16 acres of land with several buildings including the OPP Headquarters Building as well as a garage and salt storage buildings. The facility was constructed in 1982 and underwent significant cosmetic retrofits in 1997. The building previously housed shared operations between the OPP and MTO. The MTO duties including winter road maintenance have since been outsourced, and as a result a portion of the site including the Garage and salt storage buildings have been leased to a private company. These buildings were not considered within the scope of this study and were not reviewed in depth.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 11

Figure 3: OPP Southwest Regional Headquarters, London

Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry - Brantford The Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry form a historical complex located at 105 Market Street and 50-70 Wellington Street, Brantford, Ontario. The Courthouse building was originally constructed in 1852, and has undergone various additions including the construction of a land registry office in 1919. The building recently underwent heritage restorations in 2006. The building is considered a significant historical building and continues to operate as a courthouse, jail and land registry office.

Figure 4: Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry, Brantford


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 12

3.4.1 Methodology The team reviewed preliminary documents received from IO including drawings, property condition assessments, and asset plans related to each of the sites. A site visit was conducted to review building components and speak with building operators about existing issues and building performance. The information gathered focussed on the following categories of building infrastructure components and subcomponents.

Table 2: Building Infrastructure Components Infrastructure Category Description of Subcomponents

Building Envelope Roofing, windows, insulation, cladding, weather sealing. Structural Walls, roofing and foundation construction. Exterior Elements Pavement, walkways, landscaping, drainage and accessibility. Mechanical systems HVAC systems, boilers, chillers, air handling units and building automation

system. Electrical Systems Electrical power distribution system, emergency (life safety) power system,

lighting, fire alarm and communication systems. Water and Wastewater Handling Systems

Domestic water service, wastewater and rainwater management systems.

Supporting Infrastructure Municipal services, roads and other infrastructure outside of the facility’s boundary but having an impact on facility operations.

The following sections provide an overview of the findings from the documentation reviews and site visits at each of the facilities.

3.4.2 Garden City Tower 3.4.2.1 Roofs Based on discussions with the facility management, the roof components at Garden City Towers are original and assumed to be approximately 15 years old. The main roofing on tower and low-rise areas consists of conventional built-up asphalt roofing with pea-gravel ballast and modified bitumen counter-flashings. Roofs are internally drained and have overflow scuppers at parapet walls. Drain cages have flow-control weirs. A recent infra-red survey report indicates moisture has penetrated the membrane in many locations; however there have been no reports of water entry into the occupied space.

The mechanical penthouse roofing consists of modified bitumen membrane, over fibreboard insulation. This exhibits similar issues with moisture having migrated into the fibreboard insulation. Water damage observed around vents may be due to condensation from outdoor air, not membrane penetration.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 13

Figure 5: Clockwise from top left: Some water retention observed on asphalt roof, roof drains, some vegetative growth on roof

The building also has an outdoor courtyard terrace at the 2nd floor level that is accessed from the main cafeteria. The roof here consists of cast-in-place concrete pads over a waterproofing membrane, and is internally drained. The waterproofing membrane is concealed and could not be reviewed however there have been no reported operational issues with this system. A portion of the courtyard contains a daycare. The roof here was covered with what appeared to be a water permeable rubberized padding. The underlying roofing membrane could not be reviewed. The drainage of the flat roof top patio is limited to several small grates. There were no indications that surface drainage was currently inadequate.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 14

Figure 6: Rooftop courtyard

3.4.2.2 Windows The glazing consists of a mixture of aluminum framed punch windows with insulated glass vision units and glass and aluminum curtain wall. Some occupant overheating issues were reported on the building’s southwest side that may have been related to the glazing system. Other reports of thermal comfort problems ("breezy", the need for more heat during winter) may be related to windows. Some insulated glazing (IG) unit replacement has been necessary due to fogging but this has been undertaken primarily on the curtain wall on the west elevation. Fogging IG’s in a curtain wall system can be an indication of water retention and poor drainage.

3.4.2.3 Cladding and Insulation The majority of the north, east, and south tower elevations are clad with brick masonry veneer. There is approximately 180mm of insulation in most walls. There appears to be some cracking and spalling of the brick cladding. Small sections of the building at grade as well as the penthouse mechanical room are clad with metal panels which appear to be in relatively good condition. One metal panel had been blown off the rooftop modesty screen around the cooling tower.

3.4.2.4 Weather Sealing There is weather sealing at window perimeters and at joints between cladding systems, which appears to be in fair condition.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 15

Figure 7: Glazing systems and exterior cladding

3.4.2.5 Structural Components The building’s structural elements including framing, floor slabs, roof slabs and foundations are cast-in-place concrete. The majority of elements are concealed but a few specific issues related to the building structure were observed, including some cracking of exposed in-fill concrete block walls as noted in the basement area and active water penetration as reported at the south side parking entrance ramp.

3.4.2.6 Exterior Elements Exterior elements are minimal as the building footprint for the most part extends to the surrounding pavement which is property of the City. There is some asphalt paving within the breezeway drive lanes. At grade and on the rooftop terrace there is hard landscaping consisting primarily of cast-in-place concrete pads as well as some planters. Precipitation runoff is handled primarily through surface drainage to municipal storm system. Several potential issues with grading and drainage around the building were noted, in particular:

Local grading around the parking ramp could result in a disproportionate amount of runoff from the street and sidewalk entering the ramp and draining to the building drainage system.

Local grading and street drainage around and west of the bus terminal entrance on Academy St. could result in runoff entering the bus terminal at street level.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 16

Flat grading and some minor settling in the courtyard at the St. Paul Street entrance along with limited catch basins in this area could result in minor flooding and water entry through the front doors.

The sidewalk near the southeast corner had settled relative to the building foundation and grade sealants had failed. This condition was noted during previous work completed at the building 6-7 years prior and is not considered a significant ongoing issue.

Figure 8: Clockwise from top left: Cracking in concrete block, exterior courtyard, minor settling at street level, parking garage entrance

3.4.2.7 Mechanical Systems The HVAC and mechanical systems are original equipment, and these components are about 15 years old. The HVAC system comprises of boilers, chillers (two 450 ton, McQuay machines), an ice storage system, distribution pumps and piping systems. The boiler system consists of natural gas fired hot water heating boilers located in the penthouse mechanical room. All pumps have redundancy with one pump arranged as a working pump and a second as standby. The ice storage system is presently being re-commissioned. Central air handling units located in the penthouse support the ventilation and air distribution needs of the facility. The air handling units incorporate hot water heating coils and chilled water cooling coils. Space CO2 levels are continually monitored and used to control the volume of fresh (outdoor) air introduced into the building. The building automation


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 17

system (BAS) consists of a Johnson Controls Metasys Platform. For all equipment, physical condition is consistent with age and no operational issues have been reported.

3.4.2.8 Electrical Systems The incoming power supply is at 600V with a 600V power distribution system throughout the building. All large mechanical equipment and elevators are fed off the 600V power distribution system. 120/208V power panels distributed throughout the facility provide for the power needs of a typical floor. A 250kW diesel fuel generator provides emergency life safety power for the building. The lighting consists predominantly of fluorescent Lamps throughout the facility. Alternate lamps within fixtures along the building perimeter have been disconnected to maximize use of day lighting. The lighting systems are controlled by a GE lighting control system.. The building is equipped with a 2-stage fire alarm system (Siemens) with paging capabilities. The physical condition of the electrical systems is consistent with age, with no reported operational issues.

3.4.2.9 Water and wastewater handling systems The building’s domestic water service is sourced from the City of St. Catharines water mains with building drains connected to City sewer system. A duplex sump pump system is used to drain the lowest levels of the facility. The physical condition is consistent with age, with no reported operational issues.

3.4.2.10 Planning and Renewal There are no significant planning and renewal activities scheduled beyond the regular maintenance and replacement schedule. The roof is nearing its expected end of life and will likely need replacement in the next 5 years. There have been discussions about replacing the roof with a garden roof. Insulated glass units are being replaced as needed and there are currently 13 units which require replacement. Weather sealing is reaching its expected end of life and will require replacement soon.

3.4.2.11 Known Condition and Performance Issues The main condition and performance issues relate to some water penetration of the roof, which is nearing its end of life, as well as thermal comfort issues typical to many commercial buildings with curtain wall glazing, namely overheating from solar gain in areas with southern exposure with colder areas which do not experience thermal gain during winter. Some cracking of the concrete block walls as well as water penetration in the basement have been noted. Multiple IG failures at the curtainwall system are often an indication of water being retained within the system due to poor drainage. Improper or out of specification flow balancing of the air distribution systems is also likely contributing to the reported indoor thermal comfort issues.

3.4.2.12 Data Sufficiency and Quality Data was based on site reviews, building staff reports, IR Report, staff discussions, and the consultant’s experience with similar systems, and information generally has been adequate for the needs of the study.

3.4.3 Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry 3.4.3.1 Roofs On the courthouse building, sloped roofs consist of slate shingles with lead counter flashings. Roofs drain into eaves troughs and downspouts. An old tin roof was observed within the east attic space, which forms the floor of the attic. Batt insulation was present on the floor of attic spaces. We understand from building management that


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 18

the tin roof was generally left in place at the time of installation of the new roof structure and slate roof. No reported operational issues were identified with the roofing system.

Some water staining was evident on structural wood members within the east and west attic spaces, which building management indicated was the result of a previous sprinkler leak within the attic spaces. Accordingly, the sprinkler system was replaced approximately 6 years ago (circa 2005).

On the Land Registry Office, roofing consists of conventional built-up asphalt with pea-gravel ballast and exposed limestone copings. A low roof over the Victim Witness Area is covered by wood boards and has rooftop HVAC equipment installed in various locations. Direct review was not possible however this roof is assumed to consist of conventional built-up roofing, and is slated for replacement in 2012. Roofs are internally drained; the condition and capacity of the drains is unknown.

The Jail roof includes sloped roofs covered by asphalt shingles; flat roofs consisting of inverted roofs with river stone and concrete pavers (north roof and south higher roof); and conventional built-up asphalt roofing with pea-gravel ballast. Metal cap flashings and exposed limestone copings are located around the perimeter of the flat roofs. Some areas of lead flashings are also present. Building management reported an isolated area of roof leaks at the north side of the low roof. Various areas of asphalt blueberries (asphalt roof membrane bleed-through) were observed on the low central roof (roof with brick smokestack/chimney). The inverted roof areas appeared in better condition overall versus the conventional built-up roof areas.

Figure 9: A variety of rooftop types are present


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 19

3.4.3.2 Windows The Courthouse utilizes double-hung aluminum-framed punch windows with both single-glazing and insulated glass vision units (some windows have a privacy film). A large 2nd floor courtroom on the west side of the building has single-glazed windows while the 2nd floor courtrooms at the east and north sides have insulated glazing (IG) units. Single-glazed windows are also located in the east attic and west bell tower. Some insulated glazing units are present in the east attic as well. The insulated glazing units are date-stamped 1985.

Past water damage is apparent at wood sills and the base of wood jambs at the windows within attic areas, which is consistent with the water damage observed on the roof’s structural wood members. Single-glazed windows in the 2nd floor large courtroom at the west portion of building were reported to have been replaced in 2005 as part of a major building renovation (by Taylor Hazell Architects).

The Land Registry Office employs aluminum-framed insulated glazing units, ranging in age from 1978 to 1992 (based on the date stamps within IG units). One large window on the 2nd floor was single-glazed with decorative muntin bars in diagonal pattern. Some IGs have been replaced within the last 20 years (i.e. those with 1992 date stamps).

Both in the Courthouse and Land Registry Office, glazing tape and dry gaskets were observed to be “pumping out” in some isolated locations.

The Jail windows consist of newer aluminum-framed narrow windows in the detention cells and older aluminum-framed windows in the offices and kitchen areas; however neither construction nor condition were directly reviewed due to security concerns. Building management reported that the detention cell windows were replaced in 2009.

3.4.3.3 Cladding and Insulation For the Courthouse and Land Registry Office, the cladding on the south (street-facing) elevation and building corners consists of limestone, with the remaining areas (including the bell tower) consisting of brick cladding. Mass wall construction has been assumed based on the building vintage. The brick and stone are generally in good condition. Building management reported that in 2009 the exterior walls were repointed and brick and stone replaced in some areas.

Some dampness and efflorescence was observed on the lower part of the basement foundation walls and in the corners of the Court House Building. The condition and flow capacity of the foundation drains is unknown; however, this observation could potentially be indicative of poor or failing foundation drainage.

The Jail cladding consists primarily of brick masonry, with some areas of stone on the north elevation. Several isolated areas of spalled brick masonry and widespread mortar joint degradation were observed. Plaster damage was observed near the top of the west wall of the Mail Room.

3.4.3.4 Weather Sealing The sealants at the window perimeters and at the joints between cladding systems were generally in fair to good condition. Some missing or deteriorated sealants were observed on the Jail building in several locations (e.g. around window perimeters).


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 20

Figure 10: Glazing and exterior cladding

3.4.3.5 Structural Components Framing is understood to be cast-in-place concrete. The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues related to the framing were observed.

The courthouse has wood flooring on the 1st floor (visible from basement areas). Floor construction in all other areas was concealed and unknown.

The Courthouse roof includes timber framing made up of wood joists, trusses, and rafters. A secondary roof structure was visible above the old tin roof in the attic spaces (over the east and west portions of building). As noted in section 3.4.3.1 above, some water staining from a previous sprinkler leak was observed on structural wood members.

The Land Registry Office roof consists of cast-in-place concrete, with some small areas of metal decking. The Jail roof is described as cast in place concrete.

Foundations consist of rubble stone walls, which are in fair to poor condition. Efflorescence and paint peeling were observed on the interior of the basement walls; however it is unclear if water penetration is presently occurring. Some minor settling of the brick adjacent to the maintenance room in the basement of the Registry


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 21

Building was observed. Walls are load bearing masonry (assumed based on mass wall construction and lack of other visible form of structural support during our review).

Figure 11: Clockwise from top left: Water damage on timber, rubble stone foundation, secondary roof structure, ducting in basement passageways

3.4.3.6 Mechanical Systems The courthouse and land registry office are heated by common gas fired hot water boilers in the courthouse sub-basement mechanical room which dates back to major renovations undertaken in 2005. There is limited redundancy in installed boiler capacity and pumping systems. Piping dates back to original building. Ventilation air to the Courthouse is supplied from AHUs in the sub-basement and attic mechanical space; these date back to 1992 and 2005 respectively. The AHU's have hot water heating coils and direct expansion (DX) cooling. There is no redundancy in the installed air handling unit capacity. Rooftop gas fired air handling units with DX cooling provide for the ventilation needs of the Land Registry.

The Jail maintains separate and dedicated heating and domestic hot water boilers in the penthouse, with limited system redundancy. The main air handling unit is also located in the penthouse, with no redundancy in installed capacity. Split DX units within the Jail office spaces provide supplemental cooling. There is a separate make-up air and exhaust system for the kitchen.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 22

The mechanical plant serving the Courthouse is controlled by a Johnson Controls Metasys building automation system. There is no centralized building control system within the Land Registry or the Jail; these facilities utilize unitary stand-alone controls at individual equipment.

3.4.3.7 Electrical Systems The Courthouse, Land Registry and the Jail are each supported off a 208V power distribution with 120/208V power panels distributed throughout the individual facilities. The Courthouse also has a diesel fuel generator to provide for the emergency life safety power needs.

Fluorescent lamps are predominantly used throughout the facility with task lighting in some areas. Security grade lighting is used in cells.

3.4.3.8 Water and Wastewater Handling Systems The courthouse, land registry, and jail buildings have water services sourced from the City of Brantford water mains, with building drains connected to the City of Brantford Sewer System. The physical condition of these systems is consistent with age, with no reported operational issues.

3.4.3.9 Planning and Renewal The following renewal activities have been planned:

Roof on victim witness area and jail areas with current leaks will be replaced within the next year (2012);

Likely widespread insulated glazing unit replacement will become necessary within the next few years; and

Building management reported isolated brick replacements and widespread mortar joint repointing is planned for the jail for 2012. We have assumed that sealant replacements will occur at the same time as masonry and stone repairs and repointing.

3.4.3.10 Known Condition and Performance Issues There are a few performance and condition issues associated with the buildings; however these are largely consistent with the age of each building and the nature of its construction. Water damage was noted in some areas, likely due to a sprinkler system leak which resulted in significant flooding from the attic down in 2005. Other moisture-related issues have been noted in the basement and in some deterioration of the cladding. Significant work has been completed relatively recently to address condition issues previously identified. The necessary additional renewal activities are largely routine maintenance and replacement based on expected degradation of building components.

3.4.3.11 Cultural Heritage For facilities with significant cultural heritage value, while climate interactions may not vary significantly, the severity of impact may be increased as historical elements may be compromised. These considerations are relevant to the Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry Office. No cultural heritage issues have been identified with respect to the other buildings. The following provides a summary of some of the consequence-related issues.

Replacement of building elements with non historic materials;


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 23

Structural/cosmetic damage to historic building materials (stone, brick, timber);

Repair or renovations required to enhance performance could alter historic components of structure;

Failure of structural components could lead to complete loss of building; and

Increased ducting for heating/cooling adversely affect design of interior historic spaces.

3.4.3.12 Data Sufficiency and Quality The assessment was based on a review of preliminary information, site reviews, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems. Generally, the information is adequate for the purposes of this study. The following would help improve the reliability of the data:

Roof investigation report and known age of the old tin roof's replacement;

Known age and condition of non-detention cell windows (e.g., offices and kitchen);

Known timing for planned renewal of jail weather sealing; and

Investigative reports on foundation condition or known renewal plans.

3.4.4 OPP Southwest Regional Headquarters 3.4.4.1 Roofs The Main roof is modified bitumen with a granular cap sheet. Drawings indicate that the roof is insulated by 1.5 inches of rigid insulation. The parapet cap is sheet metal. There have been no reports of water entry but some small areas of ponding were noted. Some roof drains were clogged with vegetation debris at time of review, however were unclogged before leaving the site.

3.4.4.2 Windows Windows are aluminum framed punched windows with insulated glass vision units. No known performance issues other than the inherent thermal performance limitations of aluminum windows.

3.4.4.3 Cladding and Insulation Cladding consists of clay brick veneer with concrete block back-up wall. Drawings indicated that the building is insulated with 1.5 inches of rigid insulation. Cladding is generally in good condition with some deteriorated mortar around front entrance where exposed to de-icing salts.

3.4.4.4 Weather Sealing Sealants at window perimeters and at masonry movement joints were in good condition where reviewed.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 24

Figure 12: Exterior cladding, weather sealing and roof

3.4.4.5 Structural Framing consists of structural steel beams supported on load bearing concrete block masonry walls. The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues related to the framing were observed. Floor Slabs are concrete toping on composite steel deck. There was corrosion at the underside of the deck near the east entrance due to water penetration through the porch. It is our understanding that the water penetration has been repaired. Roof slabs are open web steel joists supporting a steel composite roof deck. No specific concerns were noted where reviewed. Foundations are cast-in-place concrete footings, with cast-in place concrete foundation walls in a partial basement.

3.4.4.6 Exterior Elements Exterior elements include asphalt pavement on the parking area and driveways, with primarily grass landscaping as well as some concrete walkways around the building perimeter. The grade slopes dramatically from west to east. Some settlement and cracking of walkways was observed at the east side of property. The surface drainage of the property is from west to east, with a creek at the east property border.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 25

Figure 13: Drainage, landscaping, walkways and accessibility

3.4.4.7 Mechanical Systems The Mechanical systems comprise primarily of boilers, hot water heaters and air handling equipment. There are two gas fired hot water heating boilers located in the basement mechanical room, installed in 1997. There are two air handling units located in the Basement Mechanical Room. These air handling units incorporate hot water heating coils and DX cooling coils; the DX coils are supported by remote air cooled condensers. The air handling units also have CO2 monitoring capability which helps regulate the volume of fresh (outdoor) air introduced into the air distribution system. Space humidification is achieved through the use of electric steam humidifiers installed within the air handling units. Operation of the building HVAC Systems is controlled by a Siemens building automation system.

3.4.4.8 Electrical Systems The electrical distribution systems consist of 208V three-phase power distribution with 120/208V power panels throughout the facility. There is a 125kW outdoor emergency life safety generator. Lighting systems are predominantly switchable fluorescent lamps throughout the facility. The building is equipped with a 2-stage fire alarm system (Edwards). The fire alarm panel and the building’s access control system are both monitored by an external service provider (Mircom).


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 26

3.4.4.9 Water and Wastewater Handling Systems The building’s water supply is from a well. Onsite treatment includes a water softener and a UV unit that was malfunctioning during the site visit. Warnings to use bottled water were also noted at the facility.

The septic leaching field appears to be located east of the facility between the building and the adjacent creek. The basement floor, the leaching field and the creek all appear to be within approximately 2m of each other such that there is limited gradient for gravity flow to the leaching field.

3.4.4.10 Planning and Renewal There are no known major renewal plans. Some warning cones are currently being placed in some areas of the walkway.

3.4.4.11 Known Condition and Performance Issues Besides the noted issues with exterior walkway, no additional performance or condition issues were identified.

3.4.4.12 Data Sufficiency The assessment was based on a review of preliminary information and drawings, site reviews, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems. Generally, the information is adequate for the purposes of this study.

3.5 Applicable Performance Criteria There is an array of performance criteria for each facility, from codes and standards, occupant comfort guidelines and policies and laws. An understanding of these requirements has informed the identification of possible interactions and the severity of the consequences. The following sources of criteria were used to assess these interactions and their scores.

Table 3: Performance Criteria Sources Type of Requirement Sources of Performance Criteria Laws and Policies Government Policies (Accessibility, Security, Cultural Heritage etc.)

Canada Occupational Safety and Health Regulations

Canada Labour Code Codes and Standards National Building Code

National Fire Code

2006 Ontario Building Code (OBC), and in particular Part 12 addressing resource conservation

Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1: Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings

ASHRAE Standard 55-1981, Thermal Environment Conditions for Human Occupancy

ASHRAE Standard 62-2001, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air quality


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 27

3.5.1 Performance Factors and Responses Possible performance responses were assessed based on the nature of the climate-infrastructure interaction. These are based on identified performance factors and professional judgement. For each interaction, one or more potential responses were identified. The following illustrates the performance factors and potential infrastructure response categories identified.

Table 4: Performance factors and potential response Performance Factors Potential Response

Structural Integrity Component Failure Component Deterioration Increased Loading / Stress

Functionality Loss of Capacity (Temporary) Loss of Capacity (Permanent)

Operations and Maintenance Reduced Serviceability Increased Maintenance / Replacement

Emergency Response Compromised Emergency Response Policies and Procedures Violation of Policy Tenant Comfort Reduced Tenant Comfort Insurance Considerations Increased Insurance Claims/Needs Health and Safety Public/Occupant Health and Safety Hazard Environmental Effects Environmental Impact Cultural Heritage Values Cultural Heritage Impact 3.5.2 Identification of Possible Interactions Interactions were identified for various infrastructure components based on professional judgement and the findings of the site visits. Particularly, evidence of existing climate-infrastructure interaction was noted. A master list of infrastructure components to be assessed includes:

Table 5: Infrastructure components and sub-components Infrastructure Component Infrastructure Sub-Components Cladding and Insulation Brick/Stone Cladding

Metal Cladding

Painted Surfaces

Weather Sealing Glazing Curtain Wall, Windows and Glazing Systems Water and Wastewater Systems Domestic Water Service

Wastewater Handling

Stormwater Handling Structural Elements Concrete Roof, Rraming and Floor Slabs

Timber Framing

Foundation


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 28

Infrastructure Component Infrastructure Sub-Components HVAC System Boilers/Heating Systems

Chillers/Cooling Systems

Air Handling Systems

Building Automation Systems Roof Flat Roof Membranes

Asphalt Shingles

Slate Shingles

Roof Drains Exterior Elements Walkways, Brick, Pavers

Landscaping and Vegetation

Parking Areas and Driveways Electrical and Emergency Systems Electrical Power Distribution Systems

Emergency / Alarm Systems

Lighting Systems Supporting Infrastructure Electrical Connection and Service

Gas Connection and Service

Roads and Access Based on the above identified infrastructure components and sub-components, a preliminary list of potential interactions was developed. This was augmented during the workshop with additional interactions identified by the participants. A high-level summary of infrastructure components with identified interactions is illustrated in the following table.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 29

Table 6: High-level climate-infrastructure interaction identification Infrastructure Component

Climate Factors

Free

ze-th

aw

Hum

idity

Rai

n

Snow

Sun

Tem

pera

ture

Win

d

Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N

Cladding and Insulation Y N Y Y Y N Y

Glazing Y N Y N Y Y Y

Water and Wastewater Systems N N Y Y N Y N

Structural Elements N Y Y Y N Y Y

HVAC System Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Roof Y N Y Y Y Y Y

Exterior Elements Y N Y Y N Y Y

Electrical Systems Y N Y N N Y Y

Supporting Infrastructure Y N Y Y N Y Y


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 30

4.0 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Using the data gathered during Step 2, the framework for the vulnerability assessment was created based on the matrix template provided in the PIEVC protocol. The objective of the matrix is to form the basis for the climate change vulnerability workshop and to guide workshop participants in identifying and assessing potential climate-infrastructure interactions.

4.1 Workshop Overview The purpose of the workshop is to discuss the probability and consequence of climate events affecting the infrastructure. Probability refers to the likelihood of the event happening based on weather and climate. Consequence refers to the impacts from the climate infrastructure interaction. Prior to the workshop, climate parameters were used to prepare a framework (climate-infrastructure assessment matrix) to present the probability and consequence of climate events affecting operations and infrastructure. This initial assessment was used to identify which elements of the infrastructure are most likely to be sensitive to changes to particular climate parameters.

The Workshop was designed to be an interactive exercise between the subject matter experts and the participants. The key phases of the workshop are described as follows:

The first portion of the workshop focused on providing the necessary background information required to perform the exercises.

The second portion of the workshop focused on presenting the key climate / infrastructure interactions identified by the vulnerability team and explaining the relationships between the two. This was presented in the form of a climate-infrastructure assessment matrix. Additional infrastructure components and climate events were then identified by the attendees.

The third portion of the workshop focused on assigning probability and consequences to all the climate-infrastructure interactions identified previously.

4.1.1 Climate-Infrastructure Assessment Matrix The climate-infrastructure matrix was used to guide the vulnerability assessment. Within the matrix, the climate-infrastructure interactions are identified in more detail, building a common understanding of the vulnerabilities to climate change.

During the Workshop, participants were given the opportunity to recommend any additional climate-infrastructure components. The results of the Workshop interaction and review of the climate-infrastructure interactions are then summarized within the climate-infrastructure matrix. Four key pieces of information are identified in the matrix:

infrastructure component;

Potential performance responses; and

Climate factors and trends.

For each infrastructure sub-component and climate factor, the workshop participants are asked to:


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 31

Assert whether an interaction exists between the infrastructure sub-component and climate factor;

Assess the probability of the interaction occurring; and

Assess the severity of the interaction occurring.

The scoring is then used to determine current and future vulnerability scores, by applying an appropriate “probability delta” in accordance with the climate trends.

4.1.2 Probability Assessment For each climate-infrastructure interaction, an initial probability factor was determined based on past building performance, in line with the probability scale described in the PIEVC protocol (Method A). E.g. if HVAC systems have been known to become occasionally overloaded in hot weather, this might generate a probability score of 3). For the purposes of this project a scoring of zero was not used.

Based on the anticipated trends in climate factors, a “probability delta” score was assessed for each interaction. E.g. an increase in average temperatures and extreme hot temperatures may be expected to increase probability of an HVAC-temperature interaction from “occasional” to “probable” (a factor of 3).

Table 7: PIEVC probability scoring scale Scale Probability

0 Negligible or not applicable <0.1%

<0.1 / 20

Negligible or not applicable

1 Improbable / highly unlikely 5%

1 / 20

Improbable

1:1000000

2 Remote 20%

4 / 20

Remote

1:100000

3 Occasional 35%

7 / 20

Occasional

1:10000

4 Moderate / possible 50%

10 / 20

Moderate

1:1000

5 Often 65%

13 / 20

Probable

1:100

6 Probable 80%

16 / 20

Frequent

1:10

7 Certain / highly probable >95%

>19/20

Continuous

1:1

The future probability factor is determined by adding the probability delta to the initial probability score (E.g. in the example above, a score of 6 would be generated).


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 32

The rationale for the probability assessment is based on the assumption that the relevant climate factors in most cases are not characterized by a single catastrophic event, rather a shift in average values. It therefore becomes difficult to define the probability of an interaction as solely a function of a climate factor (e.g. if a tornado hits the building, the roof could be destroyed). Instead, it assumes that the probability of an interaction is a function of both climate and infrastructure elements. (High winds and rain may increase the possibility of water penetration, depending on building condition and type of construction). This approach allows the probability to be informed by the historical performance of the building, under varying climate conditions. The probability “delta” brings the anticipated change in the underlying climate factors into play in order to determine how past and present performance will shift under these future conditions.

Figure 14: Future probability scoring methodology

The severity assessment portion of the risk analysis will take into account the overall impact of the interaction on the building, as each infrastructure component will have varying significance on the function of the overall building.

4.2 Vulnerability Assessment Workshop The vulnerability assessment team walked the participants through the results of the climate analysis and the building information, including highlights of the site visits. An overview of the infrastructure elements was presented and the various ways in which climate can interact with these elements. The climate-infrastructure interaction matrix was presented to the participants, illustrating those interactions which were considered

Historical climate trends

Future climate models

Infrastructure sensitivity to change

Performance of components under historical conditions

Likelihood of future consequences

Expected change in climate

parameters


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 33

important to the study. Participants had the opportunity to identify additional climate factors, infrastructure components and/or interactions.

4.2.1 Probability scoring results The probability scoring results was presented to the participants for each identified interaction. Participants had the opportunity to comment on and influence the probability scoring. By basing the future probability on a present probability score and a probability delta score, the calculation should be more transparent to the participants. The initial probability score should be consistent with the participants’ knowledge and experience of the buildings; hence they will be able to affirm the initial scores.

After final “initial” probability scores were assessed in the workshop, the probability deltas were evaluated to ensure they reflected an appropriate magnitude of change given the climatic drivers.

4.2.2 Severity Assessment For each identified interaction, the workshop participants were asked to assess the severity of the consequences, given that the interaction has occurred. The severity of the consequence of an interaction is considered in terms of the overall effect on the infrastructure, not the effect on the specific infrastructure component. When considering the severity, the impact across the range of performance criteria and potential responses were considered. For this reason, severity scoring may be subjective as some individuals/groups may put more emphasis on operations, human health & safety, while others may emphasize economic impacts. The severity scores were referenced to the 0 to 7 scoring system as outlined in the PIEVC protocol, and illustrated in the table below. Table 8: PIEVC severity scoring scale

Scale Magnitude Severity of Consequences and Effects

0 no effect negligible or not applicable 1 measurable

0.0125 Very low / unlikely / rare /

measurable change 2 minor

0.025 Low / seldom / marginal / change in serviceability

3 moderate 0.050

occasional loss of some capability

4 major 0.100

moderate loss of some capacity

5 serious 0.200

likely regular / loss of capacity and loss of some

function 6 hazardous

0.400 major / likely / critical / loss of

function 7 catastrophic

0.800 extreme / frequent /

continuous / loss of asset

The following table provides an example of a hypothetical risk assessment to illustrate the process, and how the factors are assessed and used to generate the final risk score.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 34

Table 9: Example risk assessment Interaction HVAC – Cooling Degree Days

Potential response Loss of capacity (temporary) Increased maintenance / replacement Reduced tenant comfort

Current probability score 3 – system is occasionally overloaded under current climate conditions

Probability delta 3 – based on increasing average and peak summer temperatures in the future

Future probability 6 – frequent overloading of HVAC systems under future climate conditions is expected

Severity score 3 - Will have moderate effect on the facility. Equipment likely to be replaced every 30 years, relative ease in upgrading cooling systems to adapt to climate change.

Risk score 3 x 6 = 18

4.3 Vulnerability Scoring Results During the workshop, each building was assessed by a different group. Each group was moderated by a member of the consulting team, and additional team members were available to provide advice to each of the groups. As the group numbers were fairly small, groups elected to present a consensus score for the facility rather than have each member present their own scores. The vulnerability scoring exercise produced very different results across the three buildings. This is likely due in part to the different nature of the facilities, but also in part to the different composition of the group, their individual experiences, their scoring rationale and judgement.

4.3.1 Overall Results The overall results reveal some of the differences in scoring between the three facilities. The St. Catharines site had the highest range of scores and was the only facility that identified high-risk interactions. The London site identified very few medium and no high scores, but had a large number of low risk interactions. Brantford identified an almost equal amount of low and medium risk interactions. The overall results are presented in the following table and chart.

Table 10: Overall Scoring Results Distribution Site Low Medium High

St. Catharines 39 36 2 London 58 3 0 Brantford 29 28 0


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 35

Figure 15: Overall Scoring Results Distribution

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Num

ber o

f Int

erac

tions

Vulnerability Score Range

St.Catharines

London

Brantford


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 36

4.3.2 Low Risks Risks assessed as “low” are considered to be risks that are either very remote or have low impact on the infrastructure, and are not priorities for further analysis or action. The following provides a high-level discussion of some of these risks. Individual risk scores can be found in Appendix E.

Table 11: Summary of low-risk interactions Infrastructure Component

St. Catharines London Brantford

Cladding and Insulation Snow, sun and temperature change, could contribute to brick deterioration, but this is a lesser concern than rain, wind and freeze thaw.

Deterioration of brick cladding, painted surfaces and weather sealing due to freeze-thaw, rain, snow, sun and wind was considered low risk based on existing conditions and exposure.

Risk to stone and brick cladding as well as weather sealing, from rain, snow, sun and wind were considered low, particularly based on the buildings’ historical performance.

Glazing Risk of snow/wind on glazing causing damage or deterioration were considered low.

Risks to glazing systems from effects of freeze-thaw, rain, snow, sun, temperature, and wind beyond normal operating limitations were considered low.

Risks to glazing from rain, sun and tornado events were considered low.2

Water and Wastewater Systems

Snow accumulation impacting stormwater handling was considered low risk.

Potential impacts of rain, snow and temperature on water and wastewater systems were considered low risks.

Risk of snow affecting stormwater handling was considered low.

Structural Elements Deterioration or loading of structure due to freeze thaw-rain, snow, and wind was considered low risk at this location.

Potential for rain, snow, temperature and wind to impact structural elements was considered a low risk.

Impacts from snow and humidity on structural elements were considered low risks.

Rain impact on concrete structural elements was considered a low risk.

HVAC Systems Risk of wind impacting heating The risk of snow, sun, Impact of wind on cooling and air

2 An extreme event such as a Tornado would have severe consequences for each of the sites, however due to the low probability of such an event, the corresponding risk score can be considered low.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 37

Infrastructure Component


systems was considered low.

Freeze thaw impacts on chillers/cooling systems was considered low.

Risk of humidity and snow impacting air handling systems was considered low.

temperature and wind impacting boiler and heating systems was considered a low risk.

Cooling and air handling systems could be affected by snow, sun, and wind; however these were considered low risks. Temperature was assessed as a medium risk to these sub-components.

handling systems was considered low.

Roof Risk of freeze-thaw affecting roof-drains was considered low.

Potential impacts of rain, snow, sun and wind on flat roofs were considered low risks.

Risk of rain or snow affecting roof drains was considered low.

Possible interactions between freeze-thaw, rain and snow on roof components were considered low risks.

Wind was assessed to have a medium risk for flat roofs and asphalt shingles but low risk for slate shingles.

Exterior Elements Risk of rain degrading or flooding walkways/pavers was considered low. Snow and freeze thaw considered more important.

Freeze-thaw, snow and sun impacts on landscape and vegetation were considered to be low risks.

Impact of rain on parking areas and driveways was considered low risk.

Risk of freeze-thaw, rain, and snow affecting walkways and pavers was considered low.

Effects of rain, sun, temperature and wind on landscaping and vegetation were considered low risks.

Risks of rain and snow impacting parking areas and driveways were considered low.

Risk of impact from snow on walkways and pavers, as well as parking areas and driveways was considered low.

Electrical Systems Impact of freeze-thaw, humidity No interactions were identified. No low risks identified.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 38



and rain on electrical systems was considered a low risk.

Risk of rain affecting alarm and emergency systems was considered low.

Supporting Infrastructure Impact of rain on electrical

connection and service was considered low risk.

Factors potentially affecting gas connection and service included freeze-thaw, rain, snow, humidity and temperature; however these were all assessed as low risks.

Risk of rain or wind affecting electrical connection and service was considered low.

Risk to gas connection and service from rain was considered low.

Impacts to roads and access from freeze-thaw, rain, snow and wind were considered low risks.

Risk of impact snow on roads and access was considered low.

Other Risk of damage to on-site gas distribution systems from humidity, rain, snow or temperature was considered low.

N/A N/A


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 39

4.3.3 High and Medium Risks Medium risks may require action or further investigation, and high risks should be acted upon. The following table provides an overview of identified high and medium risks at each of the facilities. Further discussion on a facility-specific basis is provided in the following sections.

Table 12: Summary of high and medium vulnerability infrastructure components and interactions identified Infrastructure Component / Sub-component

St. C

atha

rines

(Max

. Sc

ore)

Lo

ndon

(Max

. Sco

re)

Bra

ntfo

rd (M

ax.

Scor

e)

General Description of Interactions

Brick Cladding 24 (Low) 20 Greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick and stone failure particularly if coupled with higher rainfall.

Increased rain or snow may also increase the chance of water penetration of cladding.

Metal Cladding 21 N/A N/A Metal cladding already missing in spots. High winds could increase failure of metal cladding.

Windows and glazing

30 (Low) 12 Increased rain may lead to more water penetration (at both single- and double-glazed areas), especially if coupled with higher winds.

Hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may cause thermal comfort problems.

IG failure due to high temperatures or increased vapour pressures due to water entry and retention.

Increased wind could challenge the anchorage system. Domestic Water Service

(Low) (Low) 18 Severe high temperatures or drought may result in reduced water availability.

Stormwater Handling

16 (Low) 12 High precipitation (rain or rain on snow) events could result in reduced site drainage, flooding.

Timber Framing N/A N/A 18 Water penetration could lead to damage and degradation of timber framing.

Moisture and heat could lead to microbial decomposition of organic materials; biological attack of organic material by invasive insects, mould, fungi.

Snow accumulation or high winds could result in increased loading.

Foundation (Low) (Low) 16 Local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.

Increased ground water could result in greater hydrostatic pressure at foundation walls resulting in increased below-grade water ingress.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 40

Infrastructure Component / Sub-component

St. C

atha

rines

(Max

. Sc

ore)

Lo

ndon

(Max

. Sco

re)

Bra

ntfo

rd (M

ax.

Scor

e)


Increased snowmelt could result in water penetration through foundation walls.

Increased wind pressure on structure transfers increased loads to foundation wall.

Chillers and cooling systems

42 18 18 Extreme hot temperatures and humidity could overwhelm the capacity of the cooling systems to support the facility demands.

Average temperature increase could increase Cooling Degree Days (CDD) leading to increased operation & maintenance costs.

Change in wind strength and direction could increase or decrease cooling loads due to air leakage.

Air Handling Systems

35 18 18 Increased snow fall on outdoor equipment could hinder maintenance and result in reduction in life expectancy.

Change in wind strength or direction can alter static pressure and affect operation of air handling system.

Flat Roof Membranes

42 (Low) 15 Increased rainfall or snowfall could mean greater water retention on roof possibly leading to accelerated membrane degradation.

Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.

Increased wind will result in increased uplift forces on membrane.

Roof Drains 28 (Low) (Low) Increased rainfall or snowfall could mean greater water retention on roof possibly leading to accelerated membrane degradation

Asphalt Shingles

N/A (Low) 15 Increased rainfall, snow/ice could mean greater erosion; fastener failures.

Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.

Mechanical damage due to increased uplift from increased wind speeds.

Exterior elements (walkways, brick, pavers, parking areas and driveways)

28 12 16 Greater frequency of freeze-thaw (F/T) cycles can result in reduced service life of concrete paths.

Increased snowfall could lead to increase snow removal needs, could challenge accessibility.

Additional F/T can lead to accelerated heaving and breakup of surface materials.

Increased rainfall could lead to flooding if improperly drained.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 41

Infrastructure Component / Sub-component

St. C

atha

rines

(Max

. Sc

ore)

Lo

ndon

(Max

. Sco

re)

Bra

ntfo

rd (M

ax.

Scor

e)


Landscaping and Vegetation

12 N/A 20 Reduced rainfall could impact landscaping vegetation.

High temperatures could increase soil evaporation and irrigation needs.

High winds could damage landscaping vegetation. Electrical systems

16 (Low) 18 Excessively high temperatures could cause failure of on-site electrical components including transformers.

Water penetration could compromise electrical systems.

Severe lighting storms could overwhelm the lighting protection (grounding) system and adversely affect the electrical systems.

Emergency and alarm systems

16 N/A 15 Water penetration could compromise emergency and alarm systems. Sprinkler systems can malfunction due to severe changes in environment (e.g. freezing).

Electrical Connection and Service

35 (Low) N/A

High temperatures increase electrical demand and could lead to system outages. High winds can cause damage to electrical transmission and distribution networks.

Roads and access

N/A (Low) 16 Additional F/T can lead to accelerated heaving and breakup of surface materials, exacerbated by standing water.

Increased rainfall could cause flooding and erosion.

Increased snowfall could lead to increase snow removal needs, could challenge accessibility.

Gas system on roof

20 N/A N/A Building-operated gas distribution infrastructure vulnerable to elements including freeze-thaw, wind, rain, snow.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 42

5.0 BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS The PIEVC protocol requires an assessment of interactions ranking in the medium to high categories in terms of vulnerability. The suggested process is to define the current capacity of the infrastructure component, account for expected capacity changes, and assess current load on the infrastructure component, projected loads from climate change and other changes, and arrive at an estimate of the level of vulnerability (if future loads exceed future capacity) or adaptive capacity (if future capacity exceeds future loads).

Given that the present assessment is wide in scope and high-level, it is not expected that quantitative values for capacities and loads are feasible to generate, due to the uncertainty associated with the assumptions and the level of effort required. Alternatively, a qualitative assessment of the current capacity and performance under existing load, and future load considerations, can be used to identify potential adaptation considerations.

Future capacity will be a function of renewal activities, maintenance and equipment replacement, assuming that building usage remains fairly constant. This will be assumed unless noted otherwise.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 43

5.1 St. Catharines – Garden City Tower The Garden City Tower scored the highest vulnerability scores overall, including two high severity interactions, and 33 medium severity interactions.

Table 13: Medium and high risk analysis – St. Catharines Risk Rank (brackets indicate a tied score)

Infrastructure Sub-component(s)

Current Capacity and Performance

Future Load Considerations Adaptation Considerations

(1) Chillers / Cooling systems

The building is already experiencing reduced performance of cooling systems resulting in thermal comfort issues and exceeding humidity limits occasionally during summertime.

Building management are proposing a re-balance of the HVAC system in the short term and improved control logics to accommodate differing seasonal requirements (more heating on the North in winter and more cooling on the South during the Summer).

Ice storage system currently being re-commissioned, which should enhance cooling performance.

Humidity, high temperature, and solar heat gain increases cooling load.

Higher average temperatures and more frequent extreme high temperatures will increase probability of overloading cooling system, and increase energy use and maintenance costs.

When equipment is replaced, cooling capacity, efficiency and the ability to utilize free cooling as much as possible should be considered.


Investigating opportunities to reduce cooling loads through addressing solar heat gain through glazing should be a priority for near-term action.



June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 44

Risk Rank (brackets indicate a tied score)




(1) Flat roof membranes Currently two-ply built-up roof

is already failing prematurely, and replacement with modified bitumen is planned.

A green roof is being considered, which may have advantages in terms of reducing heat island effects, however feasibility has yet to be determined.

Temperature, precipitation and sun all increase degradation of roof membranes, hence increases of these conditions will exacerbate degradation of roofing materials.

High winds can cause flashing damage. Since this is not something the building is currently experiencing to a significant degree, further analysis of future wind patterns in the local area would be required to inform conclusions.

These issues should be addressed when roof membrane is replaced. Roofing consultant should be utilized for replacement design. Use only qualified roofing contractors, and pre-qualify if possible. Quality assurance during construction is essential.

(2) Air Handling Systems (Freeze-thaw, Temperature, Wind)

Air handling systems are operating as required under current loads.

Wind pressure exacerbates air leakage in building envelope that need to be compensated for by HVAC system.

Increased demand for cooling.

Potential for increased extremes in precipitation, wind and temperatures will further challenge performance, however this is not well quantified.

Maintenance will be key to ensuring air handling systems can operate as required.

When equipment is replaced, cooling efficiency and the ability to utilize free cooling as much as possible should be considered.

(2) Electrical connection and service

Have experienced occasional outages. Facility has emergency life safety backup generators.

Unclear trends for extreme events however possibility of increase in frequency.



June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 45





3 Windows and Glazing Glazing units failing

prematurely. Higher than normal replacement rate. Southwest exposure and thermal loading is believed to be an issue causing expansion / contraction of glazing units. Premature failure of IG’s in a curtain wall system is an indication that the system is retaining water poor due to poor drainage characteristics.

A range of conditions contributing to glazing unit failure could increase, including freeze-thaw, rain and sun. Higher winds with rain, or higher rain will mean a faster failure rate for IG and possible water ingress.

Complete review of curtain wall system to determine its intended function and evaluate ability to provide air barrier and to drain water. Maintain practice of promptly replacing failed IGs.

(4) Roof drains Some water pooling and clogging of roof drains.

Increased moisture and temperature could lead to increased growth around roof drains, exacerbating problems in the future.

Adequate roof slopes and drain configurations should be addressed when planning roof replacement.

Use roofing consultant to design repairs and qualified roofing contractors to execute the work. QA during construction is essential.

(4) Exterior elements Some heaving and cracking of

exterior walkways due to freeze thaw, occasional ponding and erosion.

Warmer temperatures may reduce need for de-icing chemicals, however higher potential freeze-thaw and rainfall could exacerbate wear on exterior elements.

Principally a maintenance issue, these areas should be regularly inspected and alternatives assessed.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 46





5 Brick cladding Brick cladding is already deteriorating in some places and replacement is planned.

Wind, rain, sun as well as thermal expansion at joints can be a cause for degradation. Increased rain and wind, especially in combination could lead to increased water penetration, resulting in damage and possible mould growth.

Keep up with masonry and sealant repairs to maintain watertight condition.

6 Metal cladding Some metal cladding on penthouse is already missing.

High winds may be responsible for damage to metal cladding. Potential for higher winds in the future but outlook is uncertain.

Check fastening details on metal panel for adequacy under high winds, and for corrosion protection.

7 Gas system on roof On-site gas distribution

equipment is exposed to elements, but is meeting current performance needs.

Increased rain or snow accumulation on rooftop could affect gas distribution systems.

Future incremental climate changes are unlikely to significantly affect this component. However, regular maintenance and inspection should be carried out.

(8) Electrical systems On-site transformer could be

susceptible to failure under extreme heat conditions.

Average temperature increase could give rise to more extreme heat conditions, increasing likelihood of transformer failure.

Monitor transformer core temperature.

Plan for redundancy. Backup generator should provide a level of safety, however additional potential failure modes should be evaluated and current emergency systems and plans enhanced if necessary.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 47





(8) Emergency and alarm systems

Freeze-thaw believed to be the cause of sprinkler malfunction in some areas (e.g. bus terminal).

Increase in freeze thaw may increase likelihood of future malfunctions, however freeze-thaw not likely directly responsible.

Freeze failure may have been caused by condensation and freezing of moist air utilized to pressurize the dry sprinkler system.

Robustness of existing sprinkler system should be assessed and steps taken to reduce likelihood of malfunction under existing conditions.

Ensuring a source of dry compressed air will reduce chances for freeze failures due to freezing of condensation within the system.

(8) Stormwater handling Systems are currently

operating as required. Potential for some flooding due to high rains.

Increase in rainfall could generate an increase in high volume rain events.


9 Landscaping and vegetation Already have removed trees

which died due to lack of moisture.

Future drought conditions are unclear. Higher temperatures and higher average precipitation are likely.


5.2 London – OPP SW Region Headquarters Table 14: Medium and high risk analysis – London Rank (brackets indicate a tied score)


Current Capacity/Performance Future Load Considerations Adaptation Considerations


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 48

Rank (brackets indicate a tied score)



(1) Air handling systems Systems are operating as

required under current loads Increased demand for

cooling.

Potential for increased extremes in precipitation, wind and temperatures, however not well quantified.

Maintain accurate log of thermal comfort complaints.


(1) Chillers / cooling systems Cooling systems are

operating as required under current loads

Extreme hot temperatures and humidity could overwhelm the capacity of the cooling systems to support the facility demands.

Average temperature increase could increase CDD leading to increased cost, maintenance.

Maintain accurate log of thermal comfort complaints.


2 Parking areas and driveways Systems are currently

operating as expected. Greater Frequency of freeze-

thaw cycles can result in reduced service life of concrete paths, and driveways due to accelerated heaving and breakup of surface materials.

Keep up with review and maintenance of these systems to limit degradation due to aging.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 49

5.3 Brantford – Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry Table 15: Medium and high risk analysis – Brantford Rank (brackets indicate a tied score)



(1) Brick / Stone cladding Building has good water

shedding at top of wall; historic masonry has more robustness to accommodate freeze-thaw. Cultural heritage impacts are higher due to historic structure, thus high severity.

Wind, rain, sun as well as thermal expansion at joints can be a cause for degradation. Increased rain and wind, especially in combination could lead to increased water penetration, resulting in damage and possible mould growth.

Continue periodic re-pointing and isolated brick and stone replacement to mitigate potential water penetration; repair and replacement cycles might increase in frequency over time.

(1) Landscaping and vegetation Systems are operating as

required under current loads.

Reduced rainfall could impact landscaping vegetation.

High temperatures could increase soil evaporation and irrigation needs.

High winds could damage landscaping vegetation.


(2) Domestic water service Systems are operating as


Jail has higher performance requirements since occupants cannot leave. Permanent occupants raise overall risk level.

Sufficient redundancy or an emergency plan needs to be in place.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 50




(2) Timber framing Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Structural timber framing is within building envelope, thus probability of moisture damage due to rain is remote. Severity is lower since regular reviews / inspections will flag issues for repair. Timber framing is a mixture of old and new.


(2) Chillers / cooling systems Systems are operating as


Humidity, high temperature, and solar heat gain increases cooling load.

Higher average temperatures and more frequent extreme high temperatures will increase probability of overloading cooling system, and increase energy use and maintenance costs.

When equipment is replaced, cooling capacity, efficiency and the ability to utilize free cooling as much as possible should be considered.


(2) Air handling systems Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Average temperature increase could increase cooling loads and increased need for free cooling.

Potential for increased extremes in precipitation, wind and temperatures, however not well quantified.

Maintenance will be the key to ensuring air handling systems can operate as required.

When equipment is replaced, cooling efficiency and the ability to utilize free cooling as much as possible should be considered.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 51




(2) Electrical systems Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Water penetration into the facility could jeopardize electrical systems.


(3) Foundation Some dampness and deterioration was noted in site visit. Likely there have been no major work or repairs completed since original construction.

Changes in groundwater can destabilize soil around foundations or cause water penetration into foundations. Wind and other loading of structure can put increased pressure on foundations.

Foundations require more detailed investigation to determine extent of water penetration issues. There is likely no waterproofing of foundation given age of facility.

(3) Exterior elements (walkways, brick, pavers, parking areas and driveways)

Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Greater Frequency of freeze-thaw cycles can result in reduced service life of concrete paths due to heaving and breakup of surface materials.

Increased rainfall could lead to flooding if improperly drained.

Increased maintenance and repairs might be required, however damage will be readily visible by building occupants and facility maintenance personnel thus low likelihood of ongoing deterioration without corrective action.

(3) Roads and access Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Additional F/T can lead to accelerated heaving and breakup of surface materials, exacerbated by standing water.

Increased rainfall could cause flooding and erosion.

Keep up with review and maintenance of these systems to limit degradation due to aging.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 52




4 Flat roof membrane Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Temperature, precipitation and sun all increase degradation of roof membranes, hence increases of these conditions will exacerbate degradation of roofing materials.

High winds can cause flashing damage. Since this is not something the building is currently experiencing to a significant degree, further analysis of future wind patterns in the local area would be required to inform conclusions.

These issues should be addressed when roof membranes are replaced.

Use roofing consultant to design repairs and qualified roofing contractors to execute the work. QA during construction is essential.

(4) Asphalt shingles Systems are operating as required under current loads.

Asphalt shingles are susceptible to wind uplift and degradation from elements in particular sun.

The need to regularly replace shingles is likely covered under lifecycle replacements.

(4) Emergency and alarm systems Systems are operating as


Water penetration into facility could jeopardize emergency and alarm systems.


(5) Windows and glazing Wind pressures already

accommodated through base design of windows.

Wind pressures might be more impactful since courtroom facility.

Condition assessment of detention cell and jail windows and glazing should be carried out.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 53




(5) Stormwater handling Some evidence of moisture in basement areas which may indicate water infiltration.

Foundation likely not waterproofed and susceptible to elevated water tables.

Heavy rain is an occasional event which can cause water infiltration due to local flooding. Rain on snow will result in less infiltration; more ice in catch basins. Rain on snow has higher concern than straight snow.

A condition assessment of the building foundation drains should be completed by a qualified contractor and any required maintenance completed. Periodic review of updated IDF data and adjacent storm drainage capacity should be completed to understand changes in flooding risk.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 54

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As a result of the analysis undertaken in this case study, a number of conclusions and recommendations have been made. These are discussed below and include:

Addressing building vulnerability: Provides recommended actions and a timeframe to address medium or high risks identified at each of the facilities.

Project challenges: Some of the issues encountered which resulted in limitations to the project and which can inform enhancements to the overall process.

Recommendations for enhancing the PIEVC protocol and process: suggestions for improvements to the protocol and process which can improve future project delivery.

Building code comments: Summary of potential implications for the Ontario Building Code as a result of the findings of this case study.

6.1 Addressing Building Vulnerability The following tables summarize recommendations which have been made to address high and medium risks identified at the facilities included in this case study.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 55

6.1.1 Garden City Tower, St. Catharines Table 16: Recommendations for Minimizing Climate Change Vulnerability at the Garden City Tower Recommendation Category


Management Action Maintain accurate log of thermal comfort

complaints.

Maintain accurate log of water penetration events, and failed IG locations.

Commission a review of the curtain wall system to determine air leakage pathways and drainage capabilities.

Investigate strategies for reducing solar gain from curtain wall


Ensure that regular maintenance efforts address high and medium risk systems identified in this study and include documentation of regular inspections.



6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

Retirement None Re-engineering & retrofit Replace flat roof sections. Employ proper design

and use qualified trades with adequate Quality Assurance.


Rebalance the Building Air Distribution Systems, especially those serving areas experiencing thermal comfort issues

Check fastening details on metal panels for adequacy under high winds, and for corrosion protection.

Investigate risk to on-site transformer and electrical systems from extreme temperatures, including potential system to monitor transformer core temperature and system redundancy.

Ensure sprinkler system compressed air source is dry. Dry compressed air will reduce chances for freeze failures due to freezing of condensation within the system.


Drought-resistant species should be used in landscaping as precautionary measure and to reduce need for irrigation.

6 months to 2 years

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

1 to 2 years

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 56

6.1.2 OPP South-West Regional Headquarters, London Table 17: Recommendations for Minimizing Climate Change Vulnerability at the OPP South-West Regional Headquarters Recommendation Category


Management Action Maintain accurate log of thermal comfort

complaints.

Maintain accurate log of water penetration events and locations


Keep up with review and maintenance of high and medium risk systems identified in this study to limit degradation due to aging and schedule component replacement promptly when required.

Investigate opportunities to improve redundancy in the potable water supply and sanitary sewage handling systems





Next 1-3 Years

Retirement None Re-engineering & retrofit

None


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 57

6.1.3 Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry Table 18: Recommendations for Minimizing Climate Change Vulnerability at the Brant County Courthouse, Jail and Land Registry Recommendation Category


Management Action Review facility assessment and restoration

protocols and frequency, particularly for infrastructure components with medium risk.

Implement backup redundancy for electrical and alarm systems. Ensure regular maintenance and inspection to areas which could allow water ingress.

Conduct condition assessment of detention cell and jail windows and glazing, and develop associated renewal plan.


6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year

6 months to 1 year


Retirement None Re-engineering & retrofit Further investigation into courthouse building’s

foundation wall potential issues should be prioritized to mitigate ongoing risk.

Continue periodic re-pointing and isolated brick and stone replacement to mitigate potential water penetration; repair and replacement cycles might increase in frequency over time.



Use roofing consultant to design repairs and qualified roofing contractors to execute the work. Quality Assurance during construction is essential.

1 to 2 years, or sooner if water penetration observed within basement areas of courthouse.


6 months to 1 year

End of equipment life

End of component/system life


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 58

6.2 Project Challenges A number of challenges were encountered in this current assessment which may inform potential enhancements to the protocol or processes followed in future work.

Climate d ata q uality: A lack of consistent data from local climate data sources created challenges in evaluating historical trends and local climate phenomena. While this may be an inherent limitation depending on the location of the infrastructure, when utilizing a study such as this as a case study where choice of buildings may be flexible, choosing buildings where climate data is known to be of good quality may help the quality of the analysis.

Quantifying e xtreme e vents: Current data does not support definitive projections of extreme climate events. Statistical downscaling can provide more precise forecasts of climate parameters, however due to the significant differences between available models, these forecasts may be inaccurate. As many of the interactions identified are a result of extreme events (high winds, heavy rainfall) or combined events, lack of visible trends for these events is a limitation.

Describing i nteractions probabilistically: Many building-climate interactions are characterized by the cumulative effect of various weather events over time, rather than a specific response to a particular event. In order to develop a completely probabilistic model of an interaction, the probability must be defined purely based on specific weather event occurring during a specified period of time (e.g. probability of 50mm rain even in 24 hrs, over a 20 year period). However, since buildings may have hundreds of sub-components which are being analyzed, each which may respond to weather in different ways, developing a comprehensive set of probabilistic models for every potential interaction is onerous. Without a numerical basis for determining probability, this becomes a subjective parameter.

Assessing i nfrastructure c apacity n umerically: Step 4 of the PIEVC protocol includes assessing the infrastructure loads and capacities numerically. Given the nature and the quantity of building components analyzed, it is inherently difficult to provide a meaningful numerical value in most cases. While in some specific cases where high-risk interactions are identified and can be linked to a specific event (e.g. accumulation of a quantity of snow which could collapse a roof structure) a numerical approach may be warranted, in most cases the level of effort would exceed the value of the result obtained. For this reason, given the nature of the interactions identified, a qualitative approach was used to inform recommendations related to vulnerabilities or adaptive capacity.

6.3 Recommendations for Enhancing the PIEVC Protocol and Process Given some of the project challenges noted above, the following recommendations may enhance the flexibility or effectiveness of the protocol in future engagements.

1) As discussed above, quantifying climatic loads and infrastructure capacities in order to determine vulnerability and/or adaptive capacity is a significant challenge. It is recommended that a ‘qualitative’ option be included in the protocol to be used when it is not appropriate to assess these values ‘numerically’.

2) The PIEVC protocol is intended to apply to a range of public infrastructure, and therefore provides a general framework which can be customized to various different engagements. While the protocol should


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 59

remain general enough to apply to this wide range of projects, it is suggested that “good practice guidance” be developed with respect to various elements to help project teams determine the most effective methods. Some suggested elements to be included are listed as follows:

Ability to incorporate feedback from multiple and un-related stakeholders at different buildings during PIEVC workshop would be beneficial. With multiple facilities it can be difficult to achieve this and remain efficient with gathering inputs relating to probability and severity.

Provide background materials on process to PIEVC workshop participants in advance of workshop to allow maximum impact from group discussions. Consider informing facility management personnel of workshop process and PIEVC protocol prior to site visits/data gathering, to filter critical areas of review at each building.

Provide fixed timelines for PIEVC process and analysis to ensure data gathering activities are reflected appropriately and in a timely fashion for the PIEVC workshop.

Various approaches to group scoring can be employed, including individual scoring and consensus. In smaller groups, such as those employed in this study, scoring by consensus may be most feasible, however the drawback of this method is that the range of subjective opinions is not captured. Alternatively, employing individual scoring can allow the full range of opinions to be recorded more readily before proceeding to developing a group ranking of risk utilizing average scores. The primary advantage of obtaining a group consensus is the ability for groups to discuss issues and different opinions before deciding on a score.

3) Establish criteria for climate anomalies (e.g., tornadoes and hurricanes) and their related interaction with PIEVC protocol, outcomes and recommendations.

6.3.1 Building Code Comments 1) Hurricane survivability is addressed in building codes for some jurisdictions in the United States of America

and the Caribbean. Current losses in Canada as a result of this type of weather are minimal, however if a higher frequency of extreme thunder storms and hurricanes is expected in Ontario, a review of the Ontario Building Code’s ability to address the survivability of our buildings in such events should be conducted.

2) Provincial and National Building Codes that currently contain provisions for energy conservation would have to track future climate trends to allow them to adapt to the forecasted changes in temperature extremes. In Ontario for example, the trend is for greater temperatures. The Ontario Building Code is one of the Provincial codes that specifically consider energy use reduction (OBC 2006 SB-10 Supplement, which came into force on January 1, 2012). Code officials would need to maintain the provisions in the Code so that minimal building performance does not fall behind energy reduction targets.

3) Under higher outdoor temperature conditions, more energy will be required to cool buildings. To maintain current and future energy reduction targets, current standards governing thermal comfort (i.e. ASHRAE Standard 55) may have to be modified. For example, the ability to permit higher indoor summer conditions and lower indoor winter conditions can lead to substantial energy savings.

4) Performance criteria for moisture management that are incorporated into building codes (e.g., CSA A440) should be updated to accommodate expected greater rainfall and expected higher frequency of extreme


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 60

rain events. Current air leakage, wind resistance, and water penetration ratings may need to be re-evaluated.

5) User-prepared standards and guidelines would have to be maintained and potentially upgraded using forecasted trends for climate change, and coordinated with the Management Actions recommendations listed earlier in Section 6.

6) Although not specifically addressed as part of this current study, changing climates may lead to a change in invasive and potentially damaging insect species. Changing weather patterns may mean greater exposure to these species that can have a significant impact on buildings that were not designed to mitigate these concerns. An increased focus on protecting buildings in some jurisdictions may be required.

7) Municipal governments currently will often regulate storm water management. Current standards may have to be altered to allow for an increased extreme rain event or for greater overall expected rainfall. Strategies such as storage, diversion, or retention may have to play a larger role.

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO - CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABIL ASSESSMENT CASE STUDY

June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

APPENDIX A Climate Analysis

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO - CLIMATE CHANGE VULNER ASSESSMENT CASE STUDY

June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Table 19: Current and Future Climate Indices Parameter Historical Climate Indices Future Climate Indices Source of Future Data

Temperature Average annual temperature [°C] Average winter temperature [°C] Average summer temperature [°C] HDD (Heating Degree Days) CDD (Cooling Degree Days)

Average annual temperature [°C] Average winter temperature [°C] Average summer temperature [°C] Average HDD in winter Average CDD in summer

IPPC CCSN Data for the appropriate grid square for all model runs and available scenarios

Deviation from normal temperature [°C] Number of period of more than 3 days with Tmax > 30°C [#Days] Length of heat waves [days] Extreme temperature over Historical Period [°C] Daily maximum temperature [°C] Number of period of more than 3 days with Tmin < -15°C [# Days] Length of cold spells [# Days]

Discussion on extreme temperature events and changes

Qualitative data from Environment Canada

Precipitation as Rain

Total annual Precipitation [mm (equiv.)] Total Summer Rainfall [mm] Total Summer Precipitation [mm]

Total annual Precipitation [mm (equiv.)] Total Summer Precipitation [mm]


Number of period of more than 10 days no rain [# Days] Length of dry spells [# Days] Number of days with rainfall Number of days with >20mm rainfall

Discussion of potential drought conditions Discussion of change in intensity of rain events (One-Day, Short Duration Less than 24 hours)


Precipitation as Snow

Total Snowfall [cm] Total Winter Precipitation [cm]

Total Winter Precipitation [cm]



June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Parameter Historical Climate Indices Future Climate Indices Source of Future Data

Number of days with snowfall Number of days with >15cm snowfall End of winter (March 21) snowpack [cm] End of February snowpack [cm]

Discussion of potential changes in snow conditions Change in Intensity of snow events (One-Day, Short Duration Less than 24 hours)


Precipitation as Ice / Ice Accretion

Number of days with freezing rain potential

Discussion of change in frequency/intensity of ice storm events Discussion of potential for ice build up on infrastructure elements

Qualitative Approach based on general scenarios output – general discussion of pattern recognition elements

Wind Speed Average annual wind speed [m/s] Average winter wind speed [m/s] Average summer wind speed [m/s]

Average annual wind speed [m/s] Average winter wind speed [m/s] Average summer wind speed [m/s]

Quantitative approach; IPPC CCSN Data for the appropriate grid square for all model runs and available scenarios (for winds in Monthly Seasonal general)

Highest Wind Gust over 30 year period [m/s]

Discussion of changes in hurricane and/or tornado event frequency/intensity Discussion of general wind patterns/gradients


Frost Number of days with freeze-thaw cycle [# Days]

Change in freeze-thaw cycle season

Quantitative / Qualitative approach to assess patterns that will generate the thaw freeze cycle

Humidity Average Annual Humidity [%] Min humidity [%] Max humidity [%] Average Annual Dew-point [°C] Highest Dew-point [°C] Lowest Dew-point [°C]

Average Annual Humidity [%] Average Annual Dew-point [ °C]

Quantitative / Qualitative approach to assess patterns, patterns that would indicated longer term increase of humidity

Sea (Water) Level Elevation

Not included in assessment Not included in assessment Not included in assessment

Fog Not included in assessment Not included in assessment Not included in assessment

Ice Not included in assessment Not included in assessment Not included in assessment

Hail Not included in assessment Not included in assessment Not included in assessment


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

APPENDIX B Site Visit Notes

Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study St. Catharines Site Notes

6/22/2012Report No. 1111510039

1

Main Element Sub-Element DescriptionCurrent Performance Life Expectancy Known Condition & Performance Issues Age Planning & Renewal Potential Climate & Infrastructure Interactions Data Sufficiency & Quality

Building EnvelopeBuilding Envelope Roofs Main Roofing on Tower and Low-rise Areas: conventional built-up asphalt roofing with

pea-gravel ballast and modified bitumen counter-flashings. Roofs are internally drained and have overflow scuppers at parapet walls. Drain cages have flow-control weirs.

Less than satisfactory

20 years IR report indicates moisture has penetrated the membrane in many locations. No reports of water entry into the occupied space.

15 There have been discussions about replacing the roof with a garden roof.

- Greater rainfall could mean greater water retention on roof due to control weirs and accelerated membrane degradation. Structural concern unlikely.- Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.- Increased wind speeds could mean increase risk of mechanical damage due to uplift.

Site review, building staff reports, IR Report, and experience with similar systems - adequate

Building Envelope Mechanical Penthouse Roofing: modified bitumen membrane, over fibreboard insulation. Roof assembly seems to be vented.


20 years IR report indicates moisture has migrated to fibreboard insulation. Damage around vents, maybe due to condensation from outdoor air, not membrane penetration.

15 No known plans. Assume would be replaced same time as main roof.

- Greater rainfall could mean greater water retention on roof due to control weirs and accelerated membrane degradation. Structural concern unlikely.- Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.- Increased wind speeds could mean increase risk of mechanical damage due to uplift.

Site review, building staff reports, IR Report, and expereince with similar systems - adequate

Building Envelope Outdoor Central Terrace: cast-in-place concrete pads over waterproofing membrane. Internally drained.

Satisfactory 20-25 years Waterproofing membrane is concealed and could not be reviewed. No reported operational issues with this system

15 No known plans - Greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles can result in reduced service life of concrete pads. Site review, building staff reports, IR Report, and expereince with similar systems - adequate

Building Envelope Windows Aluminum framed punch windows with insulated glass vision units at tower and at grade. Excludes west tower elevation and small portions of north and south elevations clad with curtain wall.


IG's - 20-25 yrsFrames - 50 yrs

Some overheating issues report at building southwest. Reports of thermal comfort problems ("breezy", the need for more heat during winter) may be related to windows. Some IG unit replacement has been necessary but primarily on the curtain wall on west elevation

15 No known plans other than replace IG's on as-needed basis.

- hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may increase thermal comfort problems.- colder temperatures and higher winds may result in more cold air leakage and heating problems.- increased rain volume may lead to more frequent IG failure and possible water penetration, especially if coupled with higher winds.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems.

Building Envelope West wall of tower is clad with glass and aluminum curtain wall system. Less than satisfactory

IG's - 20-25 yrsFrames - building life

Some overheating issues report at building southwest. Reports of thermal comfort problems ("breezy", the need for more heat during winter) may be related to windows. Average approximately 2-3 IG replacements required, primarily on the west (curtainwall) elevation

15 No known plans other than replace IG's on as-needed basis. Currently reported 13 IG's require replacement

- hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may increase thermal comfort problems.- colder temperatures and higher winds may result in more cold air leakage and heating problems.- increased rain volume may lead to more frequent IG failure and possible water penetration, especially if coupled with higher winds.


Building Envelope Cladding & Insulation The majority of the north, east, and south tower elevations are clad with brick masonry veneer. Approximately 180mm of insulation in most walls.


40 yrs There appears to be cracked and spalled bricks. 15 No known plans - greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick failure, particularly if coupled with high frequency and volume of rainfall.

Site review and experience with similar materials and applications

Building Envelope Small sections of the building at grade are clad with metal panels. Satisfactory 30 yrs Condition appears good. No known issues. 15 whi - increased solar could decrease paint life- increased wind could challenge the anchorage system


Building Envelope Metal cladding over the mechanical penthouse. Satisfactory 30 yrs Condition appears good. No known issues. 15 No known plans - increased solar could decrease paint life- increased wind could challenge the anchorage system


Building Envelope Weather Sealing Sealants at window perimeters and at joints between cladding systems Satisfactory 15 yrs Condition is fair. 15 No known plans, however sealants should be replaced soon.

-higher UV and more extreme temperatures (high and low) will lead to reduction in longevity. Site review and experience with similar materials and applications

StructuralStructural Framing Typically cast-in-place concrete framing Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues

related to the framing were observed. Some cracking of exposed in-fill concrete block walls were noted in the basement area.

15 No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.

Site review, staff discussions, and experience with similar systems. We are aware that there has been some structural issues at the building. Need to speak to CBRE representative to obtain additional information.

Structural Floor Slabs Typically cast-in-place concrete Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific performance issues were observed.



Structural Roof Slabs Typically cast-in-place concrete, some small areas of metal decking. Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific performance issues were observed.



Structural Foundations Cast-in-place concrete walls. Satisfactory Life of building Condition is fair. Active water penetration is reported to occur at south side parking entrance ramp.

15 No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.- increase ground water could result in greater hydrostatic pressure at foundation walls


Exterior ElementsExterior Elements Pavement Surrounding pavement property of City. Some asphalt paving within the breezeway drive

lanes.Satisfactory 10-12 yrs 15

Exterior Elements Landscaping Hard landscaping consisting primarily of cast-in-place concrete pads. Exterior Elements South side ramp to u/g

parkingLocal grading around the parking ramp could result in a disproportionate amount of runoff from the street and sidewalk entering the ramp and draining to the builidng drainage system.

Increases in rainfall intensity could overwhelm the building drainage system and/or the City Sewers potentially impacting drainage from the facility

Exterior Elements North side entrance to bus terminal

Local grading and street drainage around and west of the bus terminal entrance on Acadamy St. could result in runoff entering the bus terminal at street level.

Increases in rainfall intensity could overwhelm street drainage and/or the City Sewers potentially causing minor nuisance flooding at the north west corner of the bus terminal.

Exterior Elements Lot grading Flat grading and some minor settling in the courtyard at the St. Pauls St. entrance along with limited catchbasins in this area could result in minor flooding and water entry through the front doors.

Increases in rainfall intensity or failure to remove significant snow accumulations could result in local nuissance flooding and/or water entry to the facility through the door.

Exterior Elements Roof top patio Drainage of the flat roof top patio seems to be limited to three or maybe four small grates.

Increases in intensity of rain and snowmelt events could cause water accumulation in this area and increased potential for leaks into the building.

Exterior Elements Drainage Primarily surface drainage to municipal storm system. SatisfactoryMechanical SystemsMechanical Systems HVAC Systems See below for Boilers, Chillers and Air handling Units. All HVAC System Pumps arranged

as 1Working + 1Standby, arranged as Lead/Lag. Satisfactory. 20-25 years based on

Maintenance practices and runtime hours.

Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues.

Increased Severity of Summer and Winter (increased Temperature extremes) could negate the redundancy in the Pumping Systems

Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Mechanical Systems Boilers Gas Fired Hot Water Heating Boilers in Penthouse dating back to original construction (1996)

Satisfactory. 20 years (Median) Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues.

Increased severity of Winter (sustained lower winter temperatures) will increase the heating demands of the facility, potentially negating the redundancy in the installed Boiler capacity or at the very least forcing the boilers to work harder.


Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study St. Catharines Site Notes

6/22/2012Report No. 1111510039

2

Main Element Sub-Element DescriptionCurrent Performance Life Expectancy Known Condition & Performance Issues Age Planning & Renewal Potential Climate & Infrastructure Interactions Data Sufficiency & Quality

Mechanical Systems Chillers 2x450 T Chiller Plant. McQuay Chillers dating back to original construction (1996). Ice Storage System (presently under re-commissioning)


Increased severity of Summer (sustained high summer temperatures) will increase the cooling demands of the facility, potentially negating the redundancy in the installed Chiller/Ice Tank capacity or at the very least forcing the chillers to work harder. If the Chillers/Ice Tanks are unable to produce 38deg F Chilled Water, cooling performance of the AHU's will be adversely impacted.


Mechanical Systems Air Handling Units Central Air Handling Units located in the Penthouse. Ducted supply. CO2 Monitoring. Hot Water Heating Coils and Chilled Water Cooling Coils. Cooling Coils designed for 38 deg F Chilled Water Supply.


The AHU's are sized to the current Heating/Cooling/Ventilation demands. Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the AHU's to support the facility demands.


Electrical SystemsElectrical Systems Electrical Distribution

Systems600V Power Distribution. 120/208V Power Panels throughout the facility. 250 kW Emergency Life Safety Generator.

Satisfactory. 25 years (Median) / 20 years (Median) for the Life Safety Generator


N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems Lighting Systems Fluorescent Lamps throughout the facility. Alternate lamps within fixtures along the building perimeter disconnected to maximize use of daylighting. Lighting Systems controlled by a GE Lighting Control System.

Satisfactory. 10-15 years (Median) for the Lighting Control System



Electrical Systems Building Automation Systems

JCL Metasys Controls Platform Satisfactory. 15 years (Median) for a typical BAS before obsolescence starts to set in.



Electrical Systems Alarm & Communication Systems

2-Stage Fire Alarm System (Siemens) c/w Paging capabilities Satisfactory. 20 years (Median) with good maintenance practices.



Water and Wastewater Handling SystemsWater and Wastewater Handling Systems

Domestic Water Service Incoming water service extended from the City of St. Catharines Water Mains Satisfactory. N/A Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues.

Severe summers could impose an increased demand on the City Water Mains, thus potentially impacting the water available for use in the facility.


Water and Wastewater Handling Systems

Wastewater Management Systems

Building drains connected to City of St. Catharines Sewer System. Duplex Sump Pump System to drain the lowest levels of the facility.

Satisfactory. 10-15 years (Median) for Sump Pumps


Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility.



Stormwater Management Systems

Building drains connected to City of St. Catharines Sewer System. Duplex Sump Pump System to drain the lowest levels of the facility.



Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility.


Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study Brantford Site Notes

6/22/2012Report No. 1111510039

1

Main Element Sub-Element Description Current Performance Life Expectancy Known Condition & Performance Issues Estimated Age Planning & Renewal Potential Climate & Infrastructure Interactions Data Sufficiency & QualityBuilding Envelope Roofs - Courthouse Sloped roofs consist of slate shingles with lead counterflashings. Roofs drain into eavestroughs

and downspouts. Old tin roof observed within east attic space, which forms floor of attic. Batt insulation located on floor of attic spaces. We understand from building management that old tin roof was generally left in place at the time of installation of new slate roof.

Satisfactory 30 years No reported operational issues with roofing system. Some water staining on structural wood members within east and west attic spaces. Building management indicated previous sprinkler leak in attic spaces resulted in sprinkler system replacement approximately six (6) years ago (circa 2005). Water staining likely a result of previous sprinkler leak and no current water staining observed or reported.

10 No known plans - Greater rainfall could mean greater erosion of slate shingles, however material is anticipated to weather well since natural. Potential for increased roof runoff onto walls (due to overflow of eavestroughs), however existing roof overhangs are generous and will afford some measure of protection to wall areas. Structural concern unlikely.- Increased wind speeds could mean increase risk of mechanical damage due to uplift.

Greater rainfall/high winds may increase mainteance and repair cycle for slate shingles (nails, hangers); splash from overflow of eavetrough water may cause freeze thaw damage to lower parts of historic wall fabric.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems. Roof investigation report and known age of old tin roof's replacement would improve data reliability.

Building Envelope Roofs - Land Registry Office Conventional built-up asphalt roofing with pea-gravel ballast and exposed limestone copings. Low roof over Victim Witness Area is covered by wood boards and has rooftop HVAC equipment installed in various locations; this roof is assumed to consist of conventional built-up roofing, however direct review was not possible. Roofs are internally drained. Unable to ascertain whether drain cages have flow-control weirs.

Satisfactory 25 years No reported operational issues with main roofing system. Low roof over Victim Witness Area assumed to be in poor condition since replacement planned for 2012.

10 to 20 yrs Building management indicated low roof over Victim Witness Area will be replaced in 2012. No known plans for main roof, however this roof appears newer.

- Greater rainfall could mean greater water retention on roof due to accelerated membrane degradation. Structural concern unlikely.- Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.- Increased wind speeds could mean increase risk of mechanical damage due to uplift.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems. Roof investigation report and/or known age for main roof would improve data reliability.

Building Envelope Rooftop deck on Registry Building Drainage of the flat roof appears to be internal, i.e. directed to the building drains. The condition and capacity of the drains is unknown.

Increases in intensity of rain and snowmelt events could cause water accumulation in this area and increased potential for leaks into the building.

Building Envelope Roofs - Jail Sloped roofs consist of asphalt shingles. Flat roofs consist of inverted roofs with river stone and concrete pavers (north roof and south higher roof); and conventional built-up asphalt roofing with pea-gravel ballast. Metal cap flashing and exposed limestone copings are located around flat roof perimeters, with some areas of lead flashings also present.

Satisfactory 25 years No reported operational issues with sloped roof areas. Building management reported isolated area of roof leaks at north side low roof. Various areas of asphalt blueberries (asphalt roof membrane bleed-through) were observed on low central roof (roof with brick smokestack/chimney). Inverted roof areas appeared in better condition overall vs. conventional built-up roof areas.

10 to 20 yrs No known plans, however expect that roof area with current leaks will be replaced within the next year (2012).

Greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles can result in reduced service life of concrete pads.- Greater rainfall could mean greater water retention on roof due to accelerated membrane degradation for conventional built-up roof areas. Structural concern unlikely.- Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.- Increased wind speeds could mean increase risk of mechanical damage due to uplift.- Greater rainfall could mean greater erosion of asphalt shingles. Potential for increased roof runoff onto walls (due to overflow of eavestroughs).

Splash from overflow of eavetrough water may cause freeze thaw damage to lower parts of historic wall fabric

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems. Roof investigation report and/or known age for conventional built-up roof areas would improve data reliability.

Building Envelope Windows - Courthouse Double-hung aluminum-framed punch windows with both single-glazing and insulated glass vision units (some windows have privacy film). Large 2nd floor courtroom at west portion of building has single-glazed while 2nd floor courtrooms at east and north sides have insulated glazing units. Single-glazed windows are also located in east attic and west bell tower. Some insulated glazing (IG) units present in east attic as well. Insulated glazing units are date-stamped 1985.

Less than satisfactory IG's - 20-25 yrsFrames - 50 yrs

No reported operational or thermal comfort issues. Past water damage apparent at wood sills and base of wood jambs at windows within attic area, which is consistent with water damage observed on roof structural wood members. Single-glazed windows in 2nd floor large courtroom at west portion of building were reported to have been replaced in 2005 as part of major building renovation (renovation designed by Taylor Hazell Architects). Glazing tape and dry gaskets pumping out in some isolated locations.

26 No known plans other than replace IG's on as-needed basis. Likely widespread IG unit replacement will become necessary within the next few years.

- hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may cause thermal comfort problems.- colder temperatures and higher winds may result in cold air leakage and heating problems, particularly at single-glazed windows.- increased rain volume may lead to more frequent IG failure and possible water penetration (at both single- and double-glazed areas), especially if coupled with higher winds.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems - adequate.

Building Envelope Windows - Land Registry Office Aluminum-framed insulated glazing (IG) units, ranging in age from 1978 to 1992 (based on date stamps within IG units). One 2nd floor large window with single-glazing and decorative muntin bars in diagonal pattern.

Satisfactory IG's - 20-25 yrsFrames - 50 yrs

No reported operational or thermal comfort issues. No evidence of water damage, however some IG's have been replaced within the last 20 years (i.e., those with 1992 date stamps). Glazing tape and dry gaskets pumping out in some isolated locations.

20 to 33 yrs No known plans other than replace IG's on as-needed basis.

- hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may cause thermal comfort problems.- colder temperatures and higher winds may result in cold air leakage and heating problems.- increased rain volume may lead to more frequent IG failure and possible water penetration, especially if coupled with higher winds.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems - adequate.

Building Envelope Windows - Jail New aluminum-framed narrow windows in detention cells, and older aluminum-framed windows in offices and kitchen areas, however neither construction nor condition directly reviewed due to security concerns.


No reported operational or thermal comfort issues. No evidence of water damage. Building management reported detention cell windows were replaced in 2009.

2 to 35 yrs No known plans other than replace IG's on as-needed basis.

- hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may cause thermal comfort problems.- colder temperatures and higher winds may result in cold air leakage and heating problems.- increased rain volume may lead to more frequent IG failure and possible water penetration, especially if coupled with higher winds.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar systems. Known age and condition of non-detention cell windows (e.g., offices and kitchen) would improve data reliability.

Building Envelope Cladding & Insulation - Courthouse South elevation (street-facing) and building corners consist of limestone cladding. Remaining areas (including bell tower) consist of brick cladding. Assumed mass wall construction based on building vintage.

Satisfactory 50 to 100 yrs Brick and stone were generally in good condition. Building management reported exterior walls were repointed and isolated brick and stone replacements were conducted in 2009.

150 (original brick/stone installation); 2 yrs (mortar joint repointing and brick/stone replacements

No known plans, since recent renewal completed.

- greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick and stone failure, particularly if coupled with high frequency and volume of rainfall.

Site review, building staff reports, and experience with similar materials and applications - adequate.

Building Envelope Cladding & Insulation - Land Registry Office

Street-facing elevations and building corners consist of limestone cladding. Remaining areas consist of brick cladding. Assumed mass wall construction based on building vintage.

Satisfactory 50 to 100 yrs Brick and stone were generally in good condition. Building management reported exterior walls were repointed and isolated brick and stone replacements were conducted in 2009.

150 (original brick/stone installation); 2 yrs (mortar joint repointing and brick/stone replacements

No known plans, since recent renewal completed.

- greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick and stone failure, particularly if coupled with high frequency and volume of rainfall.


Building Envelope Cladding & Insulation - Land Registry Office

West wall of Registry Building Plaster damage was observed near the top of the west wal of the Mail Room. Increases in rainfall intensity could result in water entry and associated damage.

Building Envelope Cladding & Insulation - Jail Primarily brick masonry, with some areas of stone on north elevation . Assumed mass wall construction based on building vintage.

Less than satisfactory 50 to 100 yrs Several isolated areas of spalled brick masonry and widespread mortar joint degradation. 150 (original brick/stone installation)

Building management reported isolated brick replacements and widespread mortar joint repointing is planned for the next year (i.e., 2012).

greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick and stone failure, particularly if coupled with high frequency and volume of rainfall. faster brick and deterioration may lead to choice of replacement with non-historic materials in repairs.


Building Envelope Weather Sealing - Courthouse Sealants at window perimeters and at joints between cladding systems Satisfactory 15 Generally in fair to good condition where observed. 5 to 10 yrs No known plans, since recent renewal completed.

-higher UV and more extreme temperatures (high and low) will lead to reduction in longevity. Site review and experience with similar materials and applications - adequate.

Building Envelope Weather Sealing - Land Registry Office

Sealants at window perimeters and at joints between cladding systems Satisfactory 15 Generally in fair to good condition where observed. 5 to 10 yrs No known plans, since recent renewal completed.

-higher UV and more extreme temperatures (high and low) will lead to reduction in longevity. Site review and experience with similar materials and applications - adequate.

Building Envelope Weather Sealing - Jail Sealants at window perimeters and at joints between cladding systems Satisfactory 15 Missing or deteriorated sealants in several locations (e.g., around window perimeters). 15 to 20 yrs We have assumed that sealant replacements will occur at the same time as masonry and stone repairs and repointing.

-higher UV and more extreme temperatures (high and low) will lead to reduction in longevity. Site review and experience with similar materials and applications; known timing for planned renewal would improve data reliability.

Structural Framing - Courthouse Typically cast-in-place concrete framing.Court house described as cast in place concrete framing . Check - possibly load bearing masonry walls?

Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues related to the framing were observed.

150 No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure. (Possible loss of historic building)

Site review, staff discussions, and experience with similar systems - adequate.

Structural Framing - Land Registry Office Typically cast-in-place concrete framing. Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues related to the framing were observed.

150 No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure. (Possible loss of historic building)


Framing - Jail Typically cast-in-place concrete framing.Court house described as cast in place concrete framing . Check - possibly load bearing masonry walls?

Satisfactory. Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues related to the framing were observed.

150 No known plans significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure. (Possible loss of historic building)


Structural Floor Slabs - Courthouse, Land Registry Office, and Jail

Typically wood flooring for courthouse 1st floor (visible from basement areas). Flooring for all other areas was concealed and unknown.

Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific performance issues were observed. 150 No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.- Invasive insects could weaken timber floor framing


Structural Roof Slabs - Courthouse Typically consists of wood joists, trusses, and rafters. Secondary roof structure visible above old tin roof in attic spaces (east and west portions of building).

Satisfactory Life of building Some water staining on structural wood members within east and west attic spaces. Building management indicated previous sprinkler leak in attic spaces resulted in sprinkler system replacement approximately six (6) years ago (circa 2005). Water staining likely a result of previous sprinkler leak and no current water staining observed or reported.

5 to 10 yrs No known plans, since recent renewal completed as part of new roof installation.

- significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.- Additional modern timber framing integrated into historic roof trusses. Future stregthening due to wind loads may adversely affect historic design of trusses. Invasive insects from increased termperatures/humidity could weaken timber framing.


Structural Roof Slabs - Land Registry Office Typically cast-in-place concrete, some small areas of metal decking. Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific performance issues were observed. 150 yrs No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.


Structural Roof Slabs - Jail Typicaly cast-in-place concrete.Jail described as cast in place concrete . Check - possibly timber framed roof?

Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific performance issues were observed. 150 yrs No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.- Invasive insects from increased termperatures/humidity could weaken timber framing.


Structural Foundations - Courthouse Rubble stone walls Less than satisfactory Life of building Condition is fair to poor. Efflorescence and paint peeling were observed. Unclear if water penetration is occurring.

150 yrs No known plans, however expect that repairs will be conducted in the next few years based on current fair to poor condition.

- significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.- increased ground water could result in greater hydrostatic pressure at foundation walls- loss of historic building due to prohibative remediation costs

Site review, staff discussions, and experience with similar systems. Investigative reports or known renewal plans would improve data reliability.

Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study Brantford Site Notes

6/22/2012Report No. 1111510039

2

Main Element Sub-Element Description Current Performance Life Expectancy Known Condition & Performance Issues Estimated Age Planning & Renewal Potential Climate & Infrastructure Interactions Data Sufficiency & QualityStructural Foundations - Land Registry Office Stone walls; limited basement areas. Less than satisfactory Life of building Condition is fair to poor. Efflorescence and paint peeling were observed. Unclear if water

penetration is occurring.150 yrs No known plans, however

expect that repairs will be conducted in the next few years based on current fair to poor condition.



Structural Foundations - Jail Rubble stone walls Less than satisfactory Life of building Condition is fair to poor. Spalled and deteriorated rubble stone (visible from exterior) was observed. Unclear if water penetration is occurring.

150 yrs No known plans, however expect that repairs will be conducted in the next few years based on current fair to poor condition.



Structural Foundations - Jail Foundation drainage Some dampness and effluorescence observed on lower part of basement walls and in corners in the Court House Building. The condition and flow capacity of the foundation drains is unknown; however, this observation could potentially be indicative of poor or failing foundation drainage.

Increases in precipitation or infiltration or decreases in evaporation will result in increased ground saturation, which could overwhelm the foundation drains and result water damage.

Exterior Elements Landscaping - All Buildings - Landscape design adversely impacted if new ground mounted heating/cooling systems required.

Mechanical Systems Boilers (Courthouse) Gas Fired Hot Water Heating Boilers in Sub-Basement Mechanical Room Penthouse dating back to major renovation undertaken in 2005. Limited redundancy in installed Boiler capacity and pumping systems

Satisfactory 20-25 years based on Maintenance practices and runtime hours.

Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. 7 years Boilers, Piping dates back to original building

No known plans Increased Severity of Winter (increased Temperature extremes) could overwhelm the available system redundancy.


Mechanical Systems Air Handling System (Courthouse) Air Handling Units in Sub-Basement and Attic Mechanical Space dating back to 1992 and 2005 respectively. AHU's have hot water heating coils and DX Cooling. No redundancy in installed capacity.

Satisfactory 20 years (Median) Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. 19 years (Sub-Basement AHU) / 7 years (Attic AHU's)

No known plans The AHU's are sized to the current Heating/Cooling/Ventilation demands. Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the AHU's to support the facility demands.- Increased ducting for heating/cooling could adversely affect design of interior historic spaces (drop ceilings, exposed ducts, false walls)


Mechanical Systems Boilers (Land Registry) The Land Registry does not have its own Boilers; heating is supplied to it from the adjacent Courthouse.

Increased Severity of Winter (increased Temperature extremes) could overwhelm the heating capacity made available to the Land Registry from the Courthouse Systems

Mechanical Systems Air Handling System (Land Registry) Rooftop Air Handling Units with gas fired heating and DX Cooling. No redundancy in installed capacity.

Satisfactory 20 years (Median) Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. Unknown No known plans The AHU's are sized to the current Heating/Cooling/Ventilation demands. Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the AHU's to support the facility demands.- Increased ducting for heating/cooling could adversely affect design of interior historic spaces (drop ceilings, exposed ducts, false walls)


Mechanical Systems Boilers ( Jail) Separate and Dedicated Heating and Domestic Hot Water Boilers in Penthouse. Limited system redundancy.

Satisfactory 20-25 years based on Maintenance practices and runtime hours.

Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. Approx 8 years No known plans Increased Severity of Winter (increased Temperature extremes) could overwhelm the available system redundancy.


Mechanical Systems Air Handling System ( Jail) Air Handling Unit in penthouse. No redundancy in installed capacity. Split Units throughout Office spaces for supplemental cooling. Separate Make-up Air and Exhaust System for Kitchen.

Satisfactory 20 years (Median) Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. Unknown No known plans The AHU is sized to the current Heating/Cooling/Ventilation demands. Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the AHU's to support the facility demands.-Increased ducting for heating/cooling could adversely affect design of interior historic spaces (drop ceilings, exposed ducts, false walls)


Electrical Systems Electrical Distribution Systems (Courthouse)

208V Power Distribution. 120/208V Power Panels throughout the facility. Emergency Life Safety Generator.

Satisfactory 25 years (Median) / 20 years (Median) for the Life Safety Generator

Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems Electrical Distribution Systems (Land Registry)

208V Power Distribution. 120/208V Power Panels throughout the facility. Satisfactory 25 years (Median) Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems Electrical Distribution Systems (Jail) 208V Power Distribution. 120/208V Power Panels throughout the facility. Emergency Life Safety Generator.

Satisfactory 25 years (Median) / 20 years (Median) for the Life Safety Generator


Electrical Systems Lighting Systems (Courhouse and Land Registry)

Fluorescent Lamps throughout the facility. Task lighting in some areas. Satisfactory 10-15 years (Median) for the Lighting Control System


Electrical Systems Lighting Systems (Jail) Fluorescent Lamps throughout the facility. Task lighting in some areas. Security grade lighing in Cells

Satisfactory N/A Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems BAS (Courthouse) JCL Metasys Controls Platform Satisfactory 15 years (Median) for a typical BAS before obsolescence starts to set in.


Electrical Systems BAS (Land Registry) No Centralized Building Automation System/ Standalone Equipment Level/Equipment Specific Controllers

Satisfactory N/A N/A

Electrical Systems BAS (Jail) No Centralized Building Automation System/ Standalone Equipment Level/Equipment Specific Controllers

Satisfactory N/A N/A N/A N/A

Electrical Systems Alarm & Communication Systems Satisfactory 20 years (Median) with good maintenance practices.



Domestic water supply (All) Incoming water service extended from the City of Brantford Water Mains Satisfactory N/A Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. Severe summers could impose an increased demand on the City Water Mains, thus potentially impacting the water available for use in the facility.



Wastewater Management Systems (All)

Building drains connected to City of Brantford Sewer System. Satisfactory N/A Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility.



Stormwater Management Systems (All)

Building drains connected to City of Brantford Sewer System. Satisfactory N/A Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues. Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility.



Lot grading Minor settling of brick adjacent to the maintenance room in the basement of the Registry Builidng

Increases in rainfall intensity could result in water entry and associated damage.

- Changes to mainteance practices that would result in replacement of historic fabric with new materials to deal with specific environmental change. Inappropriate

Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study London Site Notes

6/22/2012Report No. 1111510039

Main Element Sub-Element Description Current Performance

Life Expectancy Known Condition & Performance Issues Age Planning & Renewal Potential Climate & Infrastructure Interactions Data Sufficiency & Quality

Building Envelope Roofs Main roof is modified bitumen with granular cap sheet. 1.5 inches rigid insulation. Parapet cap is sheet metal.

Satisfactory 20 years No reports of water entry. Some small ponded areas noted. Some roof drains were clogged at time of review.

3 No known plans - Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy.- Increased wind speeds could mean increase risk of mechanical damage due to uplift.- greater frequency of rainfall could lead to increased ponding.

Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations, garaqge drawings, and a walk-through of the facility.

Building Envelope Windows Aluminum framed punched windows with insulated glass (IG) vision units.


Good condition. No known performance issues other than aluminum windows have thermal performance limitations.

14 No known plans - hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may lead to thermal comfort problems.- colder temperatures and higher winds may result in more cold air leakage and heating problems.- increased rain volume may lead to more frequent IG failure and possible water penetration, especially if coupled with higher winds.


Building Envelope Cladding & Insulation

Clay brick vaneer with concrete block back-up wall. Building insulated with 1.5 inches of rigid insulation

Satisfactory 50 years with maintenance Generally good condition. Some deteriorated mortar around front entrance where exposed to salts.

14 No known plans - greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick failure, particularly if coupled with high frequency and volume of rainfall.- greater need for broadcasting deicing salts could lead to accelerated masonry damage where exposed

Site review, garage drawings, and experience with similar systems.

Building Envelope Weather Sealing Sealants at window perimeters and at masonry movement joints.

Satisfactory 15 yrs Good condition where reviewed 3 No known plans -higher UV and more extreme temperatures (high and low) will lead to reduction in longevity.

Site review, and experience with similar systems - adequate

Structural Framing Structural steel beams supported on load bearing concrete block masory walls

Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed but no specific issues related to the framing were observed.


Site review, structural drawings, and experience with similar systems.

Structural Floor Slabs Concrete toping on composite steel deck. Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed. Corrosion at underside of deck near east entrance due to water penetration through porch has been repaired. No other specific concerns noted.


Site review, structural drawings, and experience with similar systems - adequate.

Structural Roof Slabs Open web steel joists supporting steelp composite roof deck.

Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed. No specific concerns noted where reviewed.



Structural Foundations cast-in-place concrete footings, cast-in place concrete foundation walls in partial basement

Satisfactory Life of building The majority of elements are concealed. No specific concerns noted where reviewed.

14 No known plans - significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure- local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure.- increase ground water could result in greater hydrostatic pressure at foundation walls


Exterior ElementsExterior Elements Pavement Asphalt pavement at parking area and

drivelanesSatisfactory 10-15 yrs No known problems. 14 No known plans increase in freeze-thaw cycling could lead to increased damage rate. site revew and experience with similar systems

Exterior Elements Landscaping Primarily grass. Grade slopes dramatically from west to east. Some concrete walkways around building perimeter.

Grass satisfactory, walkways less than satisfactory.

20-25 yrs Some settlement and cracking of walkways at east side of property

14 Currently warning cones in place in some areas. Repairs are scheduled

Increased volume of ground water could continue further undermine walkways

site revew and experience with similar systems

Exterior Elements Drainage Primarily surface drain from west to east. There is a creek at the east property border

Satisfactory Life of Building No known problems. 14 No known plans

Mechanical Systems HVAC Systems See below for Boilers and Air handling Units. All HVAC System Pumps arranged as 1Working + 1Standby, arranged as Lead/Lag.

Satisfactory. 20-25 years based on Maintenance practices and runtime hours.


No known plans Increased Severity of Summer and Winter (increased Temperature extremes) could negate the redundancy in the Pumping Systems


Mechanical Systems Boilers 2 Gas Fired Hot Water Heating Boilers in Basement Mechanical Room dating back to 1997


14 No known plans Increased severity of Winter (sustained lower winter temperatures) will increase the heating demands of the facility, potentially negating the redundancy in the installed Boiler capacity or at the very least forcing the boilers to work harder.


Mechanical Systems Chillers The Air Handling Units incorporate DX Cooling Coils supported by remote air cooled condensers


14 No known plans Increased severity of Summer (sustained high summer temperatures) will increase the cooling demands of the facility, forcing the DX Cooling System to work harder. If the DX System is unable to keep up with the cooling demand, cooling performance of the AHU's will be adversely impacted.


Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study London Site Notes

6/22/2012Report No. 1111510039

Main Element Sub-Element Description Current Performance

Life Expectancy Known Condition & Performance Issues Age Planning & Renewal Potential Climate & Infrastructure Interactions Data Sufficiency & Quality

Mechanical Systems Air Handling Units Central Air Handling Units (2 Nos.) located in the Basement Mechanical Room. Penthouse. Ducted supply and Return. CO2 Monitoring. Hot Water Heating Coils and DX Cooling Coils. Electric Steam Humidification.


14 No known plans The AHU's are sized to the current Heating/Cooling/Ventilation demands. Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the AHU's to support the facility demands.


Electrical Systems Electrical Distribution Systems

208V/3Ph Power Distribution. 120/208V Power Panels throughout the facility. 125 kW Outdoor Emergency Life Safety Generator.

Satisfactory. 25 years (Median) / 20 years (Median) for the Life Safety Generator


25+ No known plans N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems Lighting Systems Switchable Fluorescent Lamps throughout the facility.

Satisfactory. 10-15 years (Median) for the Lighting Control System


Varies No known plans N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems Building Automation Systems

Siemens Building Automation System Satisfactory. 15 years (Median) for a typical BAS before obsolescence starts to set in.


14 No known plans N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.

Electrical Systems Alarm & Communication Systems

2-Stage Fire Alarm System (Edwards). Fire Alarm & Access Control Panel monitored by Mircom

Satisfactory. 20 years (Median) with good maintenance practices.


14 No known plans N/A Narrative based on feedback from Building Operations and a walk-through of the facility.


Domestic Water Service

Incoming water service extended from the City of London Water Mains

Satisfactory. N/A Physical condition consistent with age. No reported operational issues.

14 No known plans Severe summers could impose an increased demand on the City Water Mains, thus potentially impacting the water available for use in the facility.



Wastewater Management Systems

Building drains connected to City of London Sewer System. Sump Pump System to drain the lowest levels of the facility.



25+ No known plans Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility.



Stormwater Management Systems

Building drains connected to City of London Sewer System. Sump Pump System to drain the lowest levels of the facility.



25+ No known plans Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility.



Water supply Building water supply is from a well. Onsite treatments includes a water softener and a UV unit that was malfunctioning during the site visit. Warnings to use bottled water were also noted at the facility

Increases in precipitation or infiltration could potentially affect water quality. Drought conditions could affect the quantity of water available to the facility.


Septic leaching field

The septic leaching field appears to be located east of the facility between the builing and the adjacent creek. The basement floor, the leaching field and the creek all appear to be within approximately 2m of each other such that there is limited gradient for gravity flow to the leaching field.

Increases in water levels in the creek or adjacent groundwater levels near the leaching field could result in failure or poor performance of the leaching field. Pump failure during high water level/low gradient events could result in sewage backup into the facility.


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

APPENDIX C Potential Climate-Infrastructure Interactions

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO - CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT CAS STUDY

June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Climate-Infrastructure Interactions and Possible Consequences Table 20: Building Envelope Event Element Response Interaction Description Potential Consequences

(Economic) Potential Consequences (Environmental / Social)

Increased Rainfall Roof Increased Erosion

Increased rainfall could mean greater erosion of slate shingles, hanger failures

More frequent repair cycle, increased cost; replacement with non historic materials

None Identified

Increased Wind Speeds

Roof Mechanical Damage

Mechanical Damage due to increased uplift from increased wind speeds


Safety hazard from falling roofing

Increased Rainfall Roof Water Retention on Roof

Increased rainfall could mean greater water retention on roof due to accelerated membrane degradation

More frequent repair cycle, increased cost; replacement with non historic materials Damage due to water penetration on roof

Water penetration could cause mould growth

Increased Solar Radiation

Roof Life Expectancy

Increased solar exposure will decrease service life expectancy


None Identified

Increased Rainfall Roof Shingle Erosion

Greater rainfall could mean greater erosion of asphalt shingles.

More frequent repair cycle, increased cost

None Identified

Increased Freeze-Thaw Cycles

Roof Life Expectancy

Greater Frequency of freeze-thaw cycles can result in reduced service life of concrete paths

More frequent replacement/repair of concrete paths

Increased safety hazard from uneven or cracked concrete paths or pavers

Increased Rainfall Roof Increased Water Run-off

Potential for increased roof runoff onto walls (due to overflow of eaves troughs)

More frequent replacement or repair of brick/stone cladding Destruction of historic brick/stone cladding Water damage due to penetration through exterior walls

Safety hazard from crumbling / loose brick cladding


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Event Element Response Interaction Description Potential Consequences (Economic)

Potential Consequences (Environmental / Social)

Higher Temperature Windows Building Cooling Problems

Hotter temperatures, higher solar gain may cause thermal comfort problems

Increased heating costs Purchase of supplementary equipment Premature replacement of equipment

Thermal discomfort

Colder Temperature Windows Building Heating Problems

Colder temperatures and higher winds may result in cold air leakage and heating problems, particularly at single-glazed windows


Thermal discomfort


Windows Building Heating Problems

Colder temperatures and higher winds may result in cold air leakage and heating problems, particularly at single-glazed windows


Thermal discomfort

Increased Rainfall Volume

Windows Water Penetration

Increased rain volume may lead to more frequent I failure and possible water penetration (at both single- and double-glazed areas), especially if coupled with higher winds

More frequent replacement of windows Damage due to water penetration



Windows Water Penetration

Increased rain volume may lead to more frequent I failure and possible water penetration (at both single- and double-glazed areas), especially if coupled with higher winds

More frequent replacement of windows Damage due to water penetration


Increased Freeze-Thaw Cycles

Cladding and Insulation

Brick/Stone Failure

Greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles could result in faster brick and stone failure, particularly if coupled with high frequency and volume of rainfall

More frequent replacement or repair of brick/stone cladding Destruction of historic brick/stone cladding



June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039



Increased Rainfall Cladding and Insulation

Brick/Stone Failure

High frequency and volume of rainfall could result in faster brick and stone failure, particularly if coupled with greater frequency of freeze-thaw cycles





Brick/Stone Failure

Greater wind speeds could result in faster brick and stone failure, particularly if coupled with increased frequency of freeze-thaw cycles and high frequency and volume of rainfall



Extreme Temperatures

Weather Sealing

Life Expectancy

Higher UV and more extreme temperatures (high and low) will lead to reduction in longevity

More frequent replacement or repair of weather sealing Damage due to water penetration




Metal Cladding Failure

increased wind could challenge the anchorage system

More frequent replacement or repair of metal cladding Damage due to water penetration

Safety hazard from loose cladding

Increased Solar Radiation


Paint Life Expectancy

increased solar could decrease paint life

More frequent repainting of exterior elements

None Identified

Table 21: Structural Elements Event Element Response Interaction Description Potential Consequences



Framing Building Structure Load

Significant increase in wind pressure would put additional loads on the building structure

Structural repair or reinforcement required

Failure of structural elements a hazard to occupant safety Could result in loss of function of facility


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039



Could alter historic components of structure

Increased Rainfall Framing Building Structure

Local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure


Failure of structural elements a hazard to occupant safety Could result in loss of function of facility Could alter historic components of structure


Framing Building Structure





Floor Slabs Building Structure Load




Increased Rainfall Floor Slabs Building Structure





Floor Slabs Building Structure





June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039



Higher temperature, humidity

Floor Slabs Timber Failure

microbial decomposition of organic materials; biological attack of organic material by invasive insects, mould, fungi

Structural repair or reinforcement required mould or insect control



Roof Slabs Building Structure Load




Increased Rainfall Roof Slabs Building Structure





Roof Slabs Building Structure




Higher temperature, humidity

Roof Slabs Timber Failure

microbial decomposition of organic materials; biological attack of organic material by invasive insects, mould, fungi

Structural repair or reinforcement required mould or insect control



Foundations Building Structure

Significant increase in wind pressure would put additional


Failure of structural elements a hazard to occupant safety


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039



Load loads on the building structure Could result in loss of function of facility Could alter historic components of structure

Increased Rainfall Foundations Building Structure

Local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure. Increased ground water could result in greater hydrostatic pressure at foundation walls




Foundations Building Structure

Local change in ground water and soil conditions due to significant change in rainfall amounts could potentially undermine structure. Increased ground water could result in greater hydrostatic pressure at foundation walls




June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Table 22: Mechanical and Electrical Systems Event Element Response Interaction Description Potential Consequences


Extreme Temperatures (Heat)

HVAC Systems

Increased Peak Cooling Load

Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the heating systems to support the facility demands

Increased cooling costs Purchase of supplementary equipment Premature replacement of equipment Need to expand HVAC systems

Thermal discomfort Could result in loss of function of facility Expansion of HVAC could impact interior elements

Increased Cooling Degree Days

HVAC Systems

Increased Cooling Consumption

Increased number of cooling degree days will increase the use of cooling equipment and associated energy use

Increased cooling costs None Identified

Extreme Temperatures (Cold)

HVAC Systems

Increased Peak Heating Load

Extreme temperatures could overwhelm the capacity of the cooling systems to support the facility demands

Increased heating costs Purchase of supplementary equipment Premature replacement of equipment Need to expand HVAC systems

Thermal discomfort Could result in loss of function of facility Expansion of HVAC could impact interior elements

Increased Heating Degree Days

HVAC Systems

Increased Heating Consumption

Increased number of cooling degree days will increase the use of heating equipment and associated energy use

Increased heating costs None Identified


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Table 23: Water and Wastewater Handling Systems Event Element Response Interaction Description Potential Consequences


Increased Rainfall

Wastewater Drainage Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility

Increased pumping capacity or redundancy required

Contamination of water supply from sewage runoff Sewage backup in facility

Increased Rainfall

Stormwater Drainage Increased precipitation could overwhelm the City Sewers, thus potentially impacting the drainage from the facility

Increased pumping capacity or redundancy required

Contamination of water supply from sewage runoff Sewage backup in facility

Drought Domestic Water Service

Water Availability

Decreased precipitation could impose an increased demand on the City Water Mains, and groundwater thus potentially impacting the water available for use in the facility

Purchase of drinking water Damage to landscaping elements from reduced irrigation Implementation of water storage systems

Could result in loss of function of facility

Higher Temperatures

Domestic Water Service

Water Availability

Higher Temperatures could impose an increased demand on the City Water Mains, and groundwater thus potentially impacting the water available for use in the facility

Purchase of drinking water Damage to landscaping elements from reduced irrigation Implementation of water storage systems

Could result in loss of function of facility

Increased Rainfall

Stormwater Flooding Local flooding or water infiltration due to inadequate surface water drainage

Improvements to exterior grading and drainage required Water damage due to penetration

Water penetration could cause mould growth Flooding could result in loss of function of facility


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

APPENDIX D Performance Criteria


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

Table 24: Performance criteria for infrastructure components Infrastructure Component

Performance Measure or Attribute

Stru

ctur

al

Inte

grity

Faci

lity

Func

tiona

lity

Ope

ratio

ns a

nd

Mai

nten

ance

Emer

genc

y R

espo

nse

Insu

ranc

e C

onsi

dera

tions

(P

rovi

nce

is S

elf

Insu

red)

Polic

ies

and

Proc

edur

es

Effe

cts

on T

enan

t C

omfo

rt

Publ

ic a

nd

Occ

upan

t Hea

lth

and

Safe

ty

Envi

ronm

enta

l Ef

fect

s

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Va

lues

(Bra

ntfo

rd

Onl

y)

Cladding and insulation

Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

Windows and glazing systems


Domestic water service including connection to municipal service

No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No

Floor slabs Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Foundations


Framing Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes HVAC Systems

No Yes Yes Yes No Yes (temperature setbacks and CO2 levels)

Yes Yes No No

Roof slabs and structural components


Roof surface and membranes

No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

Stormwater (including roof drainage)

No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

Wastewater (including internal drains)

No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes

Weather Sealing

No Yes Yes No No No Yes No No Yes


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039


Performance Measure or Attribute

Stru

ctur

al

Inte

grity

Faci

lity

Func

tiona

lity

Ope

ratio

ns a

nd

Mai

nten

ance

Emer

genc

y R

espo

nse

Insu

ranc

e C

onsi

dera

tions

(P

rovi

nce

is S

elf

Insu

red)

Polic

ies

and

Proc

edur

es

Effe

cts

on T

enan

t C

omfo

rt

Publ

ic a

nd

Occ

upan

t Hea

lth

and

Safe

ty

Envi

ronm

enta

l Ef

fect

s

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Va

lues

(Bra

ntfo

rd

Onl

y)

Electrical Service including connection to LDC

No Yes No Yes No No No Yes No No

Gas Service including connection to supplier

No Yes No Yes No No No Yes No No

Exterior Hardscape (stairs, walkways)

No Yes Yes Yes No Yes (de-icing)

Yes Yes No Yes

Landscape (vegetation elements)

No No Yes Yes No Yes (Cessation of power tools during air quality events)

No Yes No Yes


June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039

APPENDIX E Vulnerability Assessment Results

Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study Risk Scoring Worksheet

Garden City Tower - St.Catharines

6/22/2012

Emer

genc

y R

espo

nse

Polic

ies

& P

roce

dure

s

Tena

nt C

omfo

rt

Insu

ranc

e C

onsi

dera

tions

Hea

lth &

Saf

ety

Envi

ronm

enta

l Effe

cts

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Val

ues

Com

pone

nt F

ailu

re

Com

pone

nt D

eter

ioria

tion

Incr

ease

d lo

adin

g / s

tress

Loss

of C

apac

ity (T

empo

rary

)

Red

uced

Effi

cien

cy

Loss

of C

apac

ity (P

erm

anen

t)

Red

uced

Ser

vice

abilit

y

Incr

ease

d m

aint

enan

ce /

repl

acem

ent

Com

prom

ised

Em

erge

ncy

Res

pons

e

Vio

latio

n of

Pol

icy

Red

uced

Ten

ant C

omfo

rt

Incr

ease

d in

sura

ance

cl

aim

s/ne

eds

Pub

lic/o

ccup

ant H

&S

Haz

ard

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Impa

ct

Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R Y/N P0 dP P S R

Infrastructure SystemCladding & InsulationBrick/Stone Cladding Y 6 1 7 2 14 Y 5 1 6 4 24 Y 3 0 3 3 9 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 6 0 6 3 18

Metal Cladding Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 2 4 Y 3 0 3 1 3 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 7 0 7 3 21

Painted surfaces

Weather Sealing

GlazingCurtain wall, windows and glazing Y 5 1 6 3 18 Y 6 0 6 2 12 Y 3 0 3 2 6 Y 6 0 6 5 30 Y 4 2 6 3 18 Y 6 1 7 1 7

Water & Wastewater SystemsDomestic Water Service

Wastewater Handling

Stormwater Handling Y 3 1 4 4 16 Y 2 0 2 3 6

Structural ElementsConcrete roof, framing and floor s Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 2 1 3 3 9 Y 1 0 1 3 3

Timber framing

Foundation Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 1 0 1 2 2 Y 1 1 2 2 4

HVAC SystemBoilers/Heating Systems Y 2 -1 1 2 2

Chillers/Cooling Systems Y 2 1 3 3 9 Y 6 1 7 6 42 Y 6 0 6 5 30 Y 5 2 7 4 28 Y 4 -1 3 4 12

Air Handling Systems Y 5 0 5 6 30 Y 3 -1 2 4 8 Y 3 0 3 3 9 Y 6 0 6 5 30 Y 6 1 7 5 35 Y 6 -1 5 5 25

RoofFlat roof membranes Y 7 0 7 4 28 Y 6 1 7 4 28 Y 5 0 5 3 15 Y 7 0 7 6 42 Y 5 1 6 3 18

Asphalt Shingles

Slate Shingles

Roof drains Y 3 1 4 1 4 Y 6 1 7 4 28 Y 5 0 5 3 15 Y 2 2 4 4 16

Exterior ElementsWalkways, brick, pavers Y 6 1 7 4 28 Y 3 1 4 2 8 Y 5 0 5 3 15

Landscaping & Vegetation Y 6 1 7 1 7 Y 5 1 6 2 12 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 5 0 5 2 10

Parking areas & driveways Y 6 1 7 4 28 Y 3 1 4 2 8 Y 5 0 5 3 15

Electrical SystemsElectrical Systems Y 2 1 3 1 3 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 5 10 Y 2 2 4 4 16

Emergency / Alarm Systems Y 5 1 6 2 12 Y 1 1 2 5 10 Y 2 2 4 4 16 Y 2 1 3 4 12

Supporting InfrastructureElectical connection and service Y 1 1 2 5 10 Y 6 1 7 5 35 Y 3 1 4 3 12

Gas connection and service Y 2 1 3 3 9 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 0 1 1 1

Roads & Access

Gas equipment on roof Y 4 1 5 4 20 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 3 1 4 3 12

Average temperature rise of 2.5 degreesIncrease in extreme heat and cooling

degree daysDecrease in extreme cold and heating

degree days

Slight decrease in wind speed on average, however summertime events have the potential for gustier conditions due to increase in atmospheric energy for

thunderstorm events

Slight increase based increasing winter precipitation and average temperatures

Slight increase based on increasing precipitation from analysis of all models,

and increase in winter temperatures.

Increase annual rainfall of ~50 mm Slight increase in frequency of heavy rain, and freezing rain, and rain on snow events

Trends Unclear Trends Unclear


Performance Response ( ✓ if yes) Climate Factors

Stru

ctur

al In

tegr

ity

Func

tiona

lity

Ope

ratio

ns &

M

aint

enan

ce

Freeze-thaw Humidity Rain Snow Sun Temperature Wind

Infrastructure Ontario - Climate ChangeVulnerability Assessment Case Study

Scoring Summary - St. Catharines

6/22/2012

Freeze-thaw Humidity Rain Snow Sun Temperature Wind Other

Cladding & InsulationBrick/Stone Cladding 14 0 24 9 1 6 18Metal Cladding 2 0 4 3 1 6 21Painted surfaces 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Weather Sealing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0GlazingCurtain wall, windows and glazing systems 18 0 12 6 30 18 7

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Water & Wastewater SystemsDomestic Water Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Wastewater Handling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Stormwater Handling 0 0 16 6 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Structural ElementsConcrete roof, framing and floor slabs 2 0 9 3 0 0 0Timber framing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Foundation 2 0 6 2 0 0 4

0 0 0 0 0 0 0HVAC SystemBoilers/Heating Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 2Chillers/Cooling Systems 9 42 0 0 30 28 12Air Handling Systems 30 8 0 9 30 35 25

0 0 0 0 0 0 0RoofFlat roof membranes 28 0 28 15 42 0 18Asphalt Shingles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Slate Shingles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Roof drains 4 0 28 15 0 16 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Exterior ElementsWalkways, brick, pavers 28 0 8 15 0 0 0Landscaping & Vegetation 7 0 12 2 10 0 0Parking areas & driveways 28 0 8 15 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Electrical SystemsElectrical Systems 3 2 10 0 0 16 0Emergency / Alarm Systems 12 0 10 0 0 16 12

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Supporting InfrastructureElectical connection and service 0 0 10 0 0 35 12Gas connection and service 9 2 2 0 0 1 0Roads & Access 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Gas system on roof 20 2 2 1 0 1 12


Infrastructure Ontario - Climate ChangeVulnerability Assessment Case Study Risk Scoring Worksheet

OPP SW HQ - London

6/22/2012

Emer

genc

y R

espo

nse

Polic

ies

& P

roce

dure

s

Tena

nt C

omfo

rt

Insu

ranc

e C

onsi

dera

tions

Hea

lth &

Saf

ety

Envi

ronm

enta

l Effe

cts

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Val

ues

Com

pone

nt F

ailu

re

Com

pone

nt D

eter

ioria

tion

Incr

ease

d lo

adin

g / s

tress

Loss

of C

apac

ity (T

empo

rary

)

Loss

of C

apac

ity (P

erm

anen

t)

Red

uced

Ser

vice

abili

ty

Incr

ease

d m

aint

enan

ce /

repl

acem

ent

Com

prom

ised

Em

erge

ncy

Res

pons

e

Vio

latio

n of

Pol

icy

Red

uced

Ten

ant C

omfo

rt

Incr

ease

d in

sura

ance

cl

aim

s/ne

eds

Pub

lic/o

ccup

ant H

&S

Haz

ard

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Impa

ct


Infrastructure SystemCladding & InsulationBrick/Stone Cladding Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 1 0 1 2 2 Y 1 1 2 1 2

Metal CladdingPainted surfaces Y 1 0 1 1 1

Weather Sealing Y 2 1 3 1 3 Y 1 0 1 1 1

GlazingCurtain wall, windows and glazing Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 0 2 2 1 2 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 1 3 4 1 4 Y 1 1 2 1 2

Water & Wastewater SystemsDomestic Water Service 3 1 4 2 8 Y 1 0 1 2 2 Y 2 3 5 2 10

Wastewater Handling Y 1 1 2 4 8 Y 1 0 1 2 2


Structural ElementsConcrete roof, framing and floor s Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 1 2

Timber framing

Foundation Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 1 2 1 2

HVAC SystemBoilers/Heating Systems Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 0 2 2 1 2 Y 3 -1 2 1 2

Chillers/Cooling Systems Y 1 1 2 4 8 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 3 3 6 3 18 Y 3 -1 2 1 2

Air Handling Systems Y 1 1 2 4 8 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 2 0 2 1 2 Y 3 3 6 3 18 Y 3 -1 2 1 2

RoofFlat roof membranes Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 2 0 2 2 4 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 1 0 Y 3 1 4 1 4

Asphalt ShinglesSlate ShinglesRoof drains Y 1 1 2 4 8 Y 2 0 2 4 8


Landscaping & Vegetation Y 1 1 2 2 4 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 2 3 5 1 5 Y 2 1 3 1 3

Parking areas & driveways Y 5 1 6 2 12 Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 2 0 2 2 4

Electrical SystemsElectrical Systems

Emergency / Alarm Systems

Supporting InfrastructureElectical connection and service Y 1 1 2 2 4 Y 1 1 2 2 4

Gas connection and service Y 1 1 2 4 8

Roads & Access Y 3 1 4 2 8 Y 2 1 3 1 3 Y 2 0 2 4 8 Y 1 1 2 1 2



Stru

ctur

al In

tegr

ity

Func

tiona

lity

Ope

ratio

ns &

M

aint

enan

ce

Freeze-thaw Humidity Rain Snow Sun Temperature Wind

Slight increase based increasing winter precipitation and average temperatures




Trends Unclear Trends Unclear

NA

NA

NA



degree days


thunderstorm events


Scoring Summary - London

6/22/2012

Freeze-thaw Humidity Rain Snow Sun Temperature Wind Other

Cladding & InsulationBrick/Stone Cladding 6 0 6 2 0 0 2Metal Cladding 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Painted surfaces 0 0 0 0 1 0 0Weather Sealing 0 0 3 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0GlazingCurtain wall, windows and glazing systems 2 0 2 2 2 4 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Water & Wastewater SystemsDomestic Water Service 0 0 8 2 0 10 0Wastewater Handling 0 0 8 2 0 0 0Stormwater Handling 0 0 4 1 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Structural ElementsConcrete roof, framing and floor slabs 0 0 2 2 0 0 2Timber framing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Foundation 0 0 2 2 0 2 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0HVAC SystemBoilers/Heating Systems 0 0 0 1 1 2 2Chillers/Cooling Systems 0 8 0 1 2 18 2Air Handling Systems 0 8 0 1 2 18 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0RoofFlat roof membranes 0 0 2 4 1 0 4Asphalt Shingles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Slate Shingles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Roof drains 0 0 8 8 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Exterior ElementsWalkways, brick, pavers 4 0 6 4 0 0 0Landscaping & Vegetation 0 0 4 0 1 5 3Parking areas & driveways 12 0 6 4 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Electrical SystemsElectrical Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Emergency / Alarm Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0Supporting InfrastructureElectical connection and service 0 0 4 0 0 0 4Gas connection and service 0 0 8 0 0 0 0Roads & Access 8 0 3 8 0 0 2Gas system on roof 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Infrastructure Ontario - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Case Study

Risk Scoring WorksheetBrantford Courthouse

6/22/2012

Emer

genc

y R

espo

nse

Polic

ies

& P

roce

dure

s

Tena

nt C

omfo

rt

Insu

ranc

e C

onsi

dera

tions

Hea

lth &

Saf

ety

Envi

ronm

enta

l Effe

cts

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Val

ues

Com

pone

nt F

ailu

re

Com

pone

nt D

eter

ioria

tion

Incr

ease

d lo

adin

g / s

tress

Loss

of C

apac

ity (T

empo

rary

)

Red

uced

Effi

cien

cy

Loss

of C

apac

ity (P

erm

anen

t)

Red

uced

Ser

vice

abili

ty

Incr

ease

d m

aint

enan

ce /

repl

acem

ent

Com

prom

ised

Em

erge

ncy

Res

pons

e

Vio

latio

n of

Pol

icy

Red

uced

Ten

ant C

omfo

rt

Incr

ease

d in

sura

ance

cl

aim

s/ne

eds

Pub

lic/o

ccup

ant H

&S

Haz

ard

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Cul

tura

l Her

itage

Impa

ct


Infrastructure SystemCladding & InsulationBrick/Stone Cladding Y 3 1 4 5 20 Y 1 1 2 3 6 Y 1 0 1 1 1 Y 1 1 2 1 2

Metal CladdingPainted surfacesWeather Sealing Y 1 1 2 3 6 Y 6 0 6 1 6 Y 1 1 2 1 2

GlazingCurtain wall, windows and glazing Y 2 2 4 2 8 Y 3 0 3 2 6 Y 2 1 3 4 12 Y 1 0 1 7 7

Water & Wastewater SystemsDomestic Water Service Y 2 1 3 6 18

Wastewater Handling


Structural ElementsConcrete roof, framing and floor s Y 3 1 4 2 8 Y 2 0 2 4 8

Timber framing & roof trusses Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 2 1 3 6 18

Foundation Y 3 1 4 4 16

HVAC SystemBoilers/Heating Systems

Chillers/Cooling Systems Y 3 1 4 3 12 Y 3 0 3 4 12 Y 3 3 6 3 18 Y 3 -1 2 3 6

Air Handling Systems Y 3 1 4 4 16 Y 3 0 3 4 12 Y 3 3 6 3 18 Y 3 -1 2 3 6

RoofFlat roof membranes Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 0 1 2 2 Y 2 1 3 5 15

Asphalt Shingles Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 0 1 2 2 Y 5 0 5 3 15 Y 2 1 3 5 15

Slate Shingles Y 1 1 2 1 2 Y 1 0 1 2 2 Y 1 1 2 5 10

Roof drains Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 2 1 3 2 6 Y 2 0 2 5 10


Landscaping & Vegetation Y 3 1 4 3 12 Y 2 3 5 4 20 Y 3 1 4 3 12

Parking areas & driveways Y 3 1 4 3 12 Y 3 1 4 3 12 Y 3 0 3 3 9 Y 4 0 4 4 16

Electrical SystemsElectrical Systems Y 2 1 3 6 18

Emergency / Alarm Systems Y 2 1 3 5 15

Supporting InfrastructureElectical connection and service

Gas connection and service

Roads & Access Y 3 1 4 3 12 Y 3 1 4 3 12 Y 3 0 3 3 9 Y 4 0 4 4 16



Stru

ctur

al In

tegr

ity

Func

tiona

lity

Ope

ratio

ns &

M

aint

enan

ce

Snow SunHumidity Rain TornadoTemperature Wind

NA

NA



degree days


thunderstorm events

Freeze-thaw

Trends Unclear Trends UnclearSlight increase based increasing winter precipitation and average temperatures





Scoring Summary - Brantford

6/22/2012

Freeze-thaw Humidity Rain Snow Sun Temperature Wind Tornado

Cladding & InsulationBrick/Stone Cladding 20 0 6 1 0 0 2 0Metal Cladding 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Painted surfaces 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Weather Sealing 0 0 6 0 6 0 2 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Glazing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Curtain wall, windows and glazing systems 0 0 8 0 6 0 12 7

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Water & Wastewater Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Domestic Water Service 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0Wastewater Handling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Stormwater Handling 0 0 12 9 0 0 0 0Structural Elements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Concrete roof, framing and floor slabs 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0Timber framing 0 6 18 0 0 0 0 0Foundation 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0HVAC System 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Boilers/Heating Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Chillers/Cooling Systems 0 12 0 0 12 18 6 0Air Handling Systems 0 16 0 0 12 18 6 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Roof 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Flat roof membranes 0 0 2 2 0 0 15 0Asphalt Shingles 6 0 2 2 15 0 15 0Slate Shingles 0 0 2 2 0 0 10 0Roof drains 6 0 6 10 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Exterior Elements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walkways, brick, pavers 12 0 12 9 0 0 0 0Landscaping & Vegetation 0 0 12 0 0 20 12 0Parking areas & driveways 12 0 12 9 16 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Electrical Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Electrical Systems 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0Emergency / Alarm Systems 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Supporting Infrastructure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Electical connection and service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Gas connection and service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Roads & Access 12 0 12 9 16 0 0 0


Golder Associates Ltd. 141 Adelaide Street West, Suite 1220 Toronto, Ontario M5H 3L5 Canada T: +1 (416) 366 6999

Caption Text

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment for …...INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO - CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT CASE STUDY June 22, 2012 Report No. 1111510039 ii which shows the

Documents