General

Assessing multiple residential buildings - KBCN1687

BREEAM In-Use has been developed as an environmental assessment method to assess existing assets. Typically, an asset consists of a single building or part of a single building. However, BREEAM In-Use provides an exception where certain criteria have been met, and this is set out in the relevant Technical Manual under the Eligibility Criterion 5 and reproduced below with clarifications noted in Italics. The requirements to assess multiple buildings as a single asset Criterion 5 states: An asset cannot normally include more than one building. The only exception is where several buildings meet the following criteria:

a) All buildings must be located on the same site. The site boundary must be drawn where responsibility for management or ownership of the site changes. For multifamily assets, this means all structures within the property boundary. For individual homes, e.g. single family, townhouses, this means the properties on which the homes are located are contiguous.

b) All buildings must have the same building function, similar performance, and be of similar design and age. Multifamily projects, such as garden style apartments, can still be grouped together under these criteria, even if they include different unit types.

c) Building management and maintenance policies, procedures and approach must be the same across all the buildings that make up the asset to ensure consistent implementation. Where maintenance policies, procedures, and approaches are the tenant’s responsibility through the leasing arrangements, these can vary, but overall building management needs to be the same for all properties

d) Evidence must be collated from each building that is included in the asset and where performance against the BREEAM requirements varies, the final score will be determined by the space with the lowest level of performance. The whole data set for all buildings in the assessment must be gathered and provided to the Assessor by the Client.

Demonstrating compliance for certification

The Client will be required to demonstrate how each criterion has been met and provide evidence to support the approach.
The Assessor must then confirm the criteria have been met through their evidence review and on-site verification.
Site level assessments should use a floor-area-weighted average method to confirm compliance.
For other residential assessments involving multiple buildings, representative sampling is permitted to confirm compliance. Assessors are required to confirm that the worst-case performance was applied by the Client. Assessors are required to create and document a robust representative sampling method and demonstrate that they conducted their assessment in accordance with their methodology.
Where the Assessor is unsure how to interpret or apply the criteria, they should contact the Technical Team for clarification using the BREEAM Projects webform before submission for certification. Where relevant, a copy of the technical clarification response should be submitted as supporting evidence.

Considerations before undertaking this approach

The rating will reflect the worst performance of all the buildings included within the assessment. This will limit the visibility of buildings within the grouping that may have better performance and opportunities at individual assets to improve performance. Assessing the buildings separately allows for the granularity of the assessment to provide owners with more detailed information on how improvement plans can be rolled out and the value to be gained from driving performance.
Should the buildings be sold individually, the certification status does not transfer with the individual buildings. The building(s) sold would need to undergo the full certification process, including benchmarking and the on-site visit with a licensed Assessor, to be considered certified and claimed by the new ownership.
The certificate may be updated through a mid-cycle process to remove the assessed area of the building(s) sold. This could increase the score if the building sold represented the worst-case performance. If the building removed from the certification formed the basis of the score as the 'worst-performing', the Assessor would need to complete another site visit for the mid-cycle to ensure that the new data representing the worst performance is accurate.

Asset classification – co-living developments - KBCN1568

The following is a guide only. Every project is unique, and assessors must in all cases review the suitability of the criteria to determine the most appropriate asset classification. Co-living features Co-living developments generally combine:

Self-contained residential apartments with private kitchens and bathrooms.
Apartments are typically rented for long-term stay (i.e. for periods of more than one month).
Managed communal areas for work and leisure.
Managed common facilities.
Managed landscaping and external areas.

Classification

For NC or RFO, generally the most appropriate asset classification is 'Residential institutions - long term stay.'
For BIU, it is Residential.

As a guide, assessors can also consider how their asset is classified according to local regulations.

Eligibility criteria – BIU USA Residential V6 - KBCN1668

The Eligibility Criteria for BIU V6 Residential have been updated, and the guidance below supersedes Criterion 2 in the V6.0 technical manual: Criterion 2)

a) Submission for certification must be a minimum of 12 months from completion of the dwellings.

AND

b) For a Part 2 assessment, 12 months’ utility consumption data must be available for a minimum of 80% of the dwellings.

AND

c) The asset must be intended to be a primary residence of the occupants.

Recognizing future performance - KBCN1538

BREEAM In-Use recognizes an asset's operational performance at the time of certification. Compliance cannot be based on commitments to improve the performance of an asset in the future. Where changes to an asset are made during a 3-year certification cycle:

BREEAM In-Use V6 allows the asset's mid-cycle performance to be updated and reflected in an updated certificate.
Legacy versions of BREEAM In-Use recognize updated performance via re-certification.

Residential eligibility criteria – clarification on occupancy levels [superseded] - KBCN1523

01 Nov 2014 This guidance is now superseded. Please refer to KBCN1668

Single and Multiple Certification options - KBCN1430

BIU Residential provides flexible options to allow as many residential buildings as possible to be rated and receive a certificate. These include: Apartments

Multiple certificates, one for each individual apartment unit
A single certificate for all the apartments only
A single certificate for all the apartments and the common area

Houses

Multiple certificates, one for each individual house unit
A single certificate for all the houses

Benefits of the different certification options Multiple certificates – These show the performance of each residential unit. This can show the difference in scoring and rating between units, which could be used for sales purposes or as a way of targeting specific units for improvements. When opting for multiple certificates, the rating of the best performing units will not be limited by the performance in other units. Evidence must be collated from each building that is included in the assessment and where performance against the BREEAM requirements varies, the final score will be determined by the apartment or home with the lowest level of performance. Single Certificates – These show the performance of the apartment(s) or house(s) as a whole. While performance has to be documented for each dwelling, BREEAM Projects includes features which help streamline this process. Which certification route is right for my Asset? When assessing just the Asset Performance in BREEAM In-Use Residential v6, the choice of certification option is up to the client. However, if Management Performance is included in the scope of assessment then the differing data requirements will determine which certification option the project needs to follow. These differing data requirements are driven by the energy consumption data available. The flow diagram below can be used as a guide to determine the appropriate certification route for your project, given the energy consumption data available.

The scope of the energy data available will typically be more variable for an apartment building compared to houses. Houses tend to be individually metered, and therefore certification options are more open to client choice. Note: Any asset without compliant consumption data will not be able to achieve all of the credits within Management Performance (e.g. the Operational Energy Calculator and Water) If further assistance is required, please contact BRE at [email protected]

24 Apr 2024 - Paragraph headed 'Benefits of the different certification options' updated for clarity and KBCN applied to BREEAM In-Use USA Residential 
20 July 2021 Amended for clarification and flow diagram updated

Volume Approach – Site visit requirements - KBCN1644

This guidance applies only to assessments for clients who have entered into a formal agreement with BRE to enter the Volume Approach. The aim of the Volume Approach is to assist clients with large numbers of assets, and their assessors, to conduct assessments in a robust manner, whilst also taking a practical view. From the clients’ assets that have entered the process, BRE will identify which assets may undertake a virtual site visit. The assets and their assessments cannot be new to the BREEAM In-Use process and must be identified and communicated to BRE prior to undertaking the site visits. The requirements of the virtual site visits are as follows: Gathering evidence for site assessments: In cases where BRE has identified an asset can undergo a virtual site visit, the assessor is not required to personally visit or gain access to the site, they can use the following methods:

Appoint a suitable individual, for example a main contractor or asset manager, to undertake a formal site assessment on their behalf. The appointed individual would be expected to provide a robust account to the assessor of evidence in place of their own site assessment report. We would expect the report to contain photographs and/or virtual tour stills from the building and be signed off by both the appointed individual and assessor.
For assessment issues relating to external spaces beyond the site, we will accept stills/images from Google Street View (or equivalent), provided it is demonstrated that such evidence is current.
Desk-based evidence will be accepted where evidence demonstrates that the criteria are being met as far as possible without a site assessment.

It is important to note that where one of the above 3 options has been selected, the assessor is responsible for assessing the evidence and for the awarding of any credits. Timing of workshops, testing and other subsidiary evidence submissions: Given the widespread availability of remote communication technologies, it is generally possible to undertake the majority of activities relating to our assessment criteria without the need for face-to-face contact or site assessments. With respect to workshops, the key consideration is that they take place at a time when they have a meaningful impact and achieve the aim of the criteria. With respect to subsidiary, third party assessments such as ecological site inspections or audits, desktop surveys based on available information (e.g. planning surveys, agent’s reports, photographs, Google Earth), can be used as an alternative provided there is enough material for a confident recommendation and/or outcome to be achieved.