WELL Addenda

WELL ADDENDA

Review the complete list of addenda changes made to the WELL Building Standard.

Feature 65: Activity incentive programs

Type Description
Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 17 Jan, 2017

As an alternative to one of the activity incentives provided under Feature 65, Part 1: Activity Incentive Programs, projects may create company sponsored sports teams, provided the sports teams are selected by the employees and the owner will accommodate similar incentives for alternatives upon employee request.
Note that a second activity incentive program must be implemented in order to demonstrate achievement of Feature 65.


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

Under Appendix D, change the feature type for Part 1 from "(Protocol)" to "(Organizational Protocol)"


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To promote active lifestyles through the provision of physical activity incentive programs.'


Feature 66: Structured fitness opportunities

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 05 Feb, 2018

In part description, remove: "Early education, elementary and middle schools". Add: "Early education and primary schools"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

In part title, remove: "Professional"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Add: "from a qualified professional" after "The following is offered"


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To promote safe and convenient exercise through access to on-site professional fitness training and education.'


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

Under Appendix D, change the feature type for Parts 1 and 2 from "(Protocol)" to "(Organizational Protocol)"


Feature 67: Exterior active design

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 20 Oct, 2017

In 26 Jul, 2017 AAP, remove: “per hectare [17.5 DU/acre]”. Add: "per acre [17.5 DU/hectare]"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 20 Oct, 2017

In 26 Jul, 2017 AAP, remove: “5,050 m2/hectare [22,000 ft2/acre]”. Add: "5,050 m2/acre [22,000 ft2/hectare]"


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Projects may use Option 1. Surround Density of the LEED BD+C Surrounding density and diverse uses Credit to comply with Part 3: Neighborhood Connectivity. Documentation must demonstrate that the project is located on a site where the surrounding density within 400 m [1/4 mi] of the project boundary has a minimum combined density of at least 5,050 m²/acre [22,000 ft²/hectare] of buildable land, a minimum residential density of 7 dwelling units (DU) per acre [17.5 DU/hectare], or a minimum nonresidential density (FAR) of 0.5.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "and plazas" after "walking paths"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "or open air courtyard" after "b. A plaza"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "or other landscaped elements" after "c. A garden"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Remove: "The project is eligible for at least 3 points in the LEED BD+C: New Construction "Surrounding
density and diverse uses" credit". Add: "At least four existing and publicly available diverse uses (listed in LEED BD+C: Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses, Appendix 1) are present within 800 m [0.5 mi] of the main building entrance"


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To promote active lifestyles through the integration of active design elements into the building exterior.'


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add Owner Letters of Assurance as required documentation, remove Architect Letter of Assurance.


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add annotated map as required documentation, remove Architect Letter of Assurance.


Feature 68: Physical activity spaces

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 07 Jun, 2018

In part description, remove: "building's main entrance". Add: "main building entrance"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 05 Feb, 2018

In 27 Apr, 2017 AAP, remove: "50 m [164 ft]". Add: "200 m [650 ft]"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Remove: "accessible" after "following spaces is". Add: "with complimentary access" after "building's main entrance"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "c. A trail network."


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "d. An accessible body of water or public swimming pool."


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "e. A gym, fitness, or training center."


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "f. A recreational field."


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "access to" after "through complimentary"


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

For Feature 68, Part 1, project teams may utilize a shared gym or similar physical activity space located within 200 m [650 ft] of the WELL project boundary. These spaces must be available for complimentary use by occupants. The project is required to submit documentation demonstrating that the space has adequate capacity for the project population, in addition to any other population that this shared amenity supports. Note: This ruling is specifically for Feature 68 and Feature 70. Compliance with other related features such as Feature 65 and Feature 66 is not implied.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "complimentary access to" after "occupants provide"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Remove: "At least one of the following is accessible within 0.8 km [0.5 mi] walking distance of the building". Add: "At least one of the following spaces is accessible within 0.8 km [0.5 mi] walking distance of the building’s main entrance"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Remove: "a. Parks with playgrounds, workout stations, trails or an accessible body of water". Add: "a. A green space or park with playground features"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Remove: "b. Complimentary access to gyms, playing fields or swimming pools". Add: "A workout station or fitness zone"


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'To promote physical activity through complementary on-site indoor and local outdoor physical activity spaces.'


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add annotated map as required documentation, remove Architect Letter of Assurance.


Feature 69: Active transportation support

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 07 Jun, 2018

In part description, remove: "building's main entrance". Add: "main building entrance"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 20 Mar, 2018

BREEAM NL New Construction 2014, Tra 3a: Cyclist Facilities has been accepted as an equivalent to the requirements of Feature 69. Note that Issue Tra 3a: Cyclist Facilities must be awarded the maximum credits available (3 credits) in order to comply with Feature 69 requirements.


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Projects may include bike share docking stations toward the bike storage requirements of this feature. The docks must meet the same proximity requirements listed in the feature. The project must provide a minimum of 1 storage space for privately owned bicycles, with at least 1 additional storage space for every 6 bike share docks.


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To promote daily physical activity through the provision of on-site support for active commuting.'


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add Owner Letter of Assurance as required documentation, remove Architect Letter of Assurance.


Feature 70: Fitness equipment

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 20 Oct, 2017

In 27 Apr, 2017 AAP, remove: "50 m (164 ft.)". Add: "200 m [650 ft]"


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

For Feature 70, project teams may utilize a shared gym or similar physical activity space located within 200 m [650 ft] of the WELL project boundary. These spaces must be available for complimentary use by occupants. The project is required to submit documentation demonstrating that the space has adequate capacity for the project population, in addition to any other population that this shared amenity supports. Note: This ruling is specifically for Feature 68 and Feature 70. Compliance with other related features such as Feature 65 and Feature 66 is not implied.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "complimentary access to" after "exercise by providing"


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To promote both cardiovascular and muscle-strengthening exercise by providing on-site fitness equipment.'


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add Owner Letters of Assurance as required documentation, add on-site spot checks as required verification, remove visual inspections.


Feature 71: Active furnishings

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "c. Pairs of fixed-height desks of standing and seated heights (which need not be located adjacent to each other)."


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To reduce sedentary behavior by making active workstations readily available to occupants.'


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add Owner Letters of Assurance as required documentation, add on-site spot checks as required verification, remove visual inspections.


Feature 72: Accessible design

Type Description
Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 29 May, 2018

Fukushino Machizukuri Johrei has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 72 Part 1 for Japan.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 29 May, 2018

Buildings without Barriers has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 72 Part 1. Note that this equivalency may only be used for projects in Poland.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 26 Apr, 2018

The German standard Technical Rules for Workplaces: barrier-free design for workplaces ASR V3a.2 has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 72 Accessible Design, Part 1a - Accessibility and Usability for Germany. Note that the ASR V3a.2 standard does not contain requirements for restrooms and/or drinking fountains; as a result, projects with these components must comply with the associated ADA Standards for Accessible Design requirements.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 22 Mar, 2018

Code on Accessibility in the Built Environment has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 72. Note this is only applicable to projects in Singapore.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 05 Feb, 2018

The Decree of the Ministry for Regional Development of the Czech Republic No. 398/2009 Coll. on General Technical Requirements for Barrier-Free Usage of Construction has been accepted as an equivalent for ADA Standards for Accessible Design of Feature 72 Part 1.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 25 Oct, 2017

Boverket’s mandatory provisions and general recommendations (BBR), has been accepted as an equivalent for ADA Standards for Accessible Design of Feature 72 Part 1.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 20 Oct, 2017

The Indian codes for accessible design ISO 21542:2011 - Building Construction - Accessibility and Usability of the Built Environment, Appendix B "Anthropometrics and requirements for accessibility in built environment for elders and persons with disabilities" of Part 3, National Building Code of India, 2016, Vol. 1 and "Harmonised Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier-Free Built Environment for persons with Disability and Elderly Persons, 2016 - Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India" have been accepted as alternatives for the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Either code may be used by projects located in India.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 20 Oct, 2017

Irish Building Regulations TGD Part M has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 72 Part 1.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 07 Sep, 2017

The Canadian Standards Association’s (CSA) “Accessible Design for the Built Environment” (CSA B651-12) has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 72 Part 1 and 2. This equivalency may be used in Canada.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 31 Aug, 2017

The Taiwanese code for accessible design "Design Specifications of Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities" is an acceptable alternatives to the American Disabilities Act.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

The German DIN 18040:2010 Construction of accessible buildings - design principles is acceptable for Feature 72 Part 1a. Note, similarly to the application of the Americans with Disabiliites Act (ADA) Standards for Accessible Design to buildings in the US, the German code must apply to all types of buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" buildings for the purposes of the code.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Previously published as an AAP:
Projects may apply the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative region Building Department’s Barrier Free Access (BFA) Design Manual, 2008, in lieu of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards for Accessible Design.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Add: "or comparable local code or standards" after "Accessible Design"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

Remove: "Appendix B: Standards"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 20 Mar, 2017

The Chinese Code for Accessibility Design (GB50763-2012) is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the code must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered ""accessible"" buildings for the purposes of the law.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 20 Mar, 2017

The Dutch Standard NEN 1814 is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 20 Mar, 2017

Previously published as an AAP:
The Alberta Building Code - Barrier-Free Design section 3.8 is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

The Building Requirements for Persons with Disabilities from British Columbia Building Code has been deemed equivalent to the ADA for Feature 72. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the BC Building Code must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" building for the purposes of the code.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

The Codi d´Accesibilitat de Catalunya is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the code must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" building for the purposes of the law.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

The Australian Disability Discrimination Act is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the Australian Disability Discrimination Act must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" building for the purposes of the code.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

The French Law regarding PMRs or 'personnes à mobilité réduite' (French Decree No 2006-555 of 17 May 2006, or the latest adoption in effect at the project's registration date) is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the code must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" building for the purposes of the law.


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To promote equity by providing buildings that are accessible and usable by people of all physical abilities.'


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

Replace the existing Part 1 text with the following:
"Part 1: Accessibility and Usability

The projects demonstrates compliance with one of the following:
a. Current ADA Standards for Accessible Design
b. ISO 21542:2011 - Building Construction - Accessibility and Usability of the Built Environment, Appendix B: Standards"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

Change the name of the feature from "ADA Accessible Design Standards" to "Accessible Design"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

The Dutch Integral Accessibility Standard is an accepted equivalent for the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the Dutch Integral Accessibility Standard must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" building for the purposes of the code.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

The Madrid Technical Building Code for Accessibility is an accepted equivalent for the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the Madrid Technical Building Code for Accessibility must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered "accessible" building for the purposes of the code.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 23 May, 2016

Hong Kong's Barrier Free Access is an acceptable equivalent to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) design regulations. Note, similarly to the application of the ADA to buildings in the US, the code must apply to all buildings. Furthermore, all WELL buildings should be considered ""accessible"" building for the purposes of the code.


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 06 May, 2016

Projects in Canada may utilize the Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), as amended January 1, 2015, as an equivalent local standard to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 06 May, 2016

The UK Part M Volume 2 Standard (Buildings other than dwellings) may be used lieu of the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design as long as the following additional requirements are met:

1. Signage adheres to the requirements of BS 8300: Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disables people, as referenced within the Part M Volume 2 Standard.
2. Drinking fountains adhere to the requirements of ADA Standards for Accessible Design, Sections 211 and 602 for Drinking Fountains.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

In Part 1a, change "Buildings" to "Projects"


Feature 73: Ergonomics: visual and physical

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 07 Jun, 2018

In 06 May, 2016 AAP, remove: "For Part 3 (Seat Flexibility)". Add: "For Feature 73, Part 3"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 07 Jun, 2018

In part description, remove: "At least 30%...of the following". Add: "At 30% of workstations that are at seated height or similar work surfaces, users have the ability to alternate between sitting and standing through one of the following:"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 05 Feb, 2018

For Part 1a, add: ", including laptops," after "screens"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 20 Oct, 2017

For Part 3b, add: "or BIFMA G1 guidelines" after "...HFES 100 standard"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 21 Aug, 2017

IS 3663: 1991 - 'Dimensions of Tables and Chairs for Office Purposes (Second Revision)' has been accepted as an alternative for the requirements of Feature 73 Part 3


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 21 Aug, 2017

Code NPR 1813 has been accepted as an alternative to HFES 100 for the requirements of Feature 73 Part 3.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

In Part 4a, remove: "employees" after "reaching requirements for". Add: "occupants" after "reaching requirements for"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

In Part 4b, remove: "employees" after "a foot rest to allow". Add: "occupants" "a foot rest to allow"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Remove: "employee". Add: "occupant"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Remove: "employees" after "Workstations in which". Add: "occupants" after "Workstations in which"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 17 Jul, 2017

The European Standard EN-1335 and Dutch Standard NEN 1812, Type A and Type B only, have been approved as acceptable alternatives to HFES 100. Please note EN-1335 Type C has not been approved as an acceptable alternative.


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

For Feature 73, Part 2, the project may provide height adjustable tables and meeting tables apart from workstation desks to meet the feature requirements.


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 27 Apr, 2017

For Feature 73, Part 2, the project may provide a lower threshold of the required initial percentage of sit/stand workstations required by the feature, in conjunction with a future purchase commitment and an educational campaign. The campaign must encourage walking during the working day and highlight the benefits of sit-stand desks. The project must also provide instructions to occupants on how to request a sit-stand desk. The project must provide sit-stand desks in multiple options/styles (for trial use by occupants) and commit to accommodate all occupant requests for a sit-stand desk, even in exceedance of the feature requirement.


Intent
Type: Intent
Post Date: 24 Oct, 2016

In the Feature description, remove the second paragraph. Replace with the following text:
'Intent: To reduce physical strain and maximize ergonomic comfort and safety.'


Alternative Adherence Path
Type: Alternative Adherence Path
Post Date: 06 May, 2016

For Feature 73, Part 3, alternative seat height adjustability and seat depth adjustability ranges may be accepted if the average height of the expected occupants differs significantly from the average height of the US population.


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

In Part 2a, change "Adjustable Height standing desks." to "Adjustable height sit-stand desks."


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

In Part 3b, delete "or BIFMA G1 guidelines."


Verification type
Type: Verification type
Post Date: 10 Feb, 2016

Add Owner Letters of Assurance as required documentation, add on-site spot checks as required verification, remove visual inspections.


Feature 74: Exterior noise intrusion

Type Description
Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 01 Nov, 2018

For Part 2a, remove: "The sound pressure...peak hour Leq". Add: "Average sound pressure level from outside noise intrusion does not exceed 40 dBA"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 01 Nov, 2018

For Part 2a, remove: "The sound pressure level from outside noise intrusion is less than or equal to 40 dBA based on the peak hour Leq". Add: "Average sound pressure level from outside noise intrusion does not exceed 40 dBA"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 06 Jun, 2018

Building Bulletin 93 (BB93) 2015 has been approved as an acceptable method for spaces within education buildings to comply with Feature 74, Part 4 for projects in the United Kingdom. Note that Table 1 of BB93 also includes noise level limits for administration and ancillary spaces and states that “Where a type of room is not listed, the nearest approximation should be used."


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Remove: "6,000 m²". Add: "1,900 m²"


Amendment
Type: Amendment
Post Date: 26 Jul, 2017

Remove: "6,000 m²". Add: "1,900 m²"


Equivalency
Type: Equivalency
Post Date: 17 Jan, 2017

The Code for Design of Sound Insulation of Civil Buildings’ (B50118-2010) and ‘Environmental Quality Standard for Noise’ (GB3096-2008) have been approved an acceptable method to comply with F74.