MT Cost Estimator V0.21

Table Index — click to navigate

1 — MT Intensity by Building Typology 2 — MT Intensity by Structural System 3 — MT Package Pricing — CLT & Glulam 4 — Fire Rating Impact on MT Intensity 5 — NBC 2020 Encapsulation Requirements 5e — MT Insurance — CoC & Operational 6 — Concrete Intensity by Typology & System 6b — LCA Embodied Carbon — Concrete Structure 6c — CIP Concrete Intensity 12–18 Storeys by Market 7 — Concrete All-In Placed Rate — 16 Markets 8 — Gypsum / Finish Allowance 9 — Foundation Calculation Parameters 10a — Podium Structural Grid — Concrete Intensity 10b — Transfer Slab Types — Cost & Schedule 11 — Steel Intensity by Building Program 12 — Steel Installed Cost Matrix 13 — Steel Add-ons for Like-for-Like 13a — Steel All-In Erected Rate — 16 Markets 14 — Steel Cost by Install Factor 15 — Oil Price Impact on Structural Cost 16 — Carbon Price Impact on Structural Cost 20 — Construction Cost Stack Benchmarks 21 — MT Acoustic Topping Types 22 — Location Cost Index (CCI) — 16 Markets 23 — Parkade, Encapsulation & Conveying Params 24 — Schedule Base Weeks by Typology 25 — Schedule Dynamics — all variables exposed 26 — Core / Lateral Seismic Intensity by City 27 — MT Core System Impacts ✎ editable 28 — Seismic Reference Weights & Core Scaling Tables 17–20, 21–23 are on the Estimator and Financial Estimates tabs respectively

Table 1Material Intensity by Building Typology (m³/m²)

Building Type	Storeys	FRR	Low	Avg	High	Primary System

Source: Project Compass database 200+ MT projects; report Section 2.4.2

Table 2Material Intensity by Structural System Type (m³/m²)

Structural System	Modifier	Default Glulam %	Notes

Key correction: adding purlins reduces panel span and therefore panel thickness, lowering total material intensity despite adding members. Post, Beam & Panel has no purlins so panels must span beam-to-beam and are thicker. Source: Project Compass project database

Table 3MT Package Pricing Basis ($/m³) — edit frequencies to recalculate weighted average

Edit the % frequency cells below. Weighted averages update live and sync to the main estimator sliders.

Product	$1,000	$1,250	$1,500	$1,750	$2,000	Wtd. Avg
CLT (SPF) — frequency %						$1,575/m³
Total: 100% ⚠ Must sum to 100%

Product	$3,000	$3,500	$4,000	$4,500	$5,000	Wtd. Avg
Glulam (DF) — frequency %						$4,050/m³
Total: 100% ⚠ Must sum to 100%

Includes material, CNC fabrication, project management, design, connections, nominal shipping. Install erection additional 15–30% of pkg. Weighted average syncs to main estimator Glulam/CLT sliders. Source: Project Compass project records.

Table 4Fire Rating Impact on Material Intensity — Glulam vs. CLT Split

FRR	Glulam multiplier	CLT multiplier	Design Impact
Encapsulated (0 min exposed)	1.00×	1.00×	Baseline; structure fully covered by drywall
45 min exposed	1.05–1.10×	1.00–1.03×	Minor char allowance on beams; panels largely unaffected
60 min (1 hr)	1.10–1.20×	1.04–1.07×	Moderate beam/column upsizing; CLT panel thickness increase modest
90 min	1.15–1.25×	1.06–1.09×	Significant beam growth; CLT adds one lamination layer
120 min (2 hr)	1.25–1.40×	1.10×	Largest driver for Glulam; CLT adds char layer (approx. +10% volume). Required above 6 st in BC

Glulam and CLT respond differently to FRR because they char differently. Glulam beams and columns must be oversized to maintain structural capacity after the sacrificial char layer burns away — this drives the 25–40% volume increase at 2 hr. CLT panels develop a self-insulating char layer that limits heat penetration; only a single additional lamination is typically required, resulting in approximately 10% more panel volume at 2 hr. These split multipliers are live in the estimator: at 2 hr FRR (residential and office), the Glulam cost component is multiplied by 1.325 and the CLT cost component by 1.10. The 1 hr and encapsulated typologies carry no additional multiplier — their intensity benchmarks already reflect typical 1 hr exposed design.

Table 5NBC 2020 Encapsulation Requirements by Building Type

Building Type / Typology Key	Storeys	Construction Class	Min Rating (min)	Layers	Default Encap%	Exposed Surface Limits	NBC Reference

Sources: NBC 2020 Div B Articles 3.1.4, 3.1.6, 3.2.2.48, 3.2.2.56; Canadian Wood Council EMTC Guide (Ontario); CBHCC Proposed Change Forms 1870 & 1963 (NBC 2025 public review); NRC CLT Fire Research 2023. Encapsulation rating (ULC S146) delays ignition of mass timber — distinct from fire resistance rating (FRR). 2× 12.7 mm Type X gypsum achieves ~50 min encapsulation rating. All EMTC buildings require sprinklers per NFPA 13.

Table 5eMass Timber Insurance — Course of Construction & Operational Benchmarks

Coverage Type	System	Rate (% of TIV/yr)	Premium vs. CIP	Benchmark Project	Key Risk Drivers	Notes
Course of Construction (Builders Risk)	CIP Concrete / Steel	0.50 – 1.10%	Baseline	Halifax 2024: $250K–$475K on ~$45M TIV	Fire, water, theft, collapse	Accrues weekly over full construction schedule. Shorter schedule = lower total cost. Tool default: 0.80%/yr.
Course of Construction (Builders Risk)	Mass Timber	0.88 – 1.67%	+40% to +80%	Halifax 2024: $475K–$750K on same TIV	Exposed timber combustibility pre-encapsulation; moisture swelling; char risk; limited insurer capacity	Premium reflects unprotected timber phase. Once encapsulated & weather-tight, risk profile improves. Sprinklers reduce premium 10–20%.
Operational Building Insurance (Property All-Risk)	CIP Concrete / Steel	0.15 – 0.35%	Baseline	BC mid-rise: $8–14/m²/yr on $3,500–$5,500/m² replacement cost	Fire, water, liability	Applied to replacement cost of completed building. Tool default: $10/m²/yr (≈ 0.25% on $4,000/m²).
Operational Building Insurance (Property All-Risk)	Mass Timber	0.18 – 0.44%	+10% to +25%	Enclosed MT: ~$11–18/m²/yr	Higher replacement cost (timber vs. concrete); residual char-risk perception; some insurers unfamiliar with MT	Lower premium than CoC because building is enclosed and sprinklered. Market improving as MT track record grows. Tool default: +15%.

Course of Construction Insurance Formula

          CoC Cost ($) = TIV × Rate (%/yr) × Schedule (wks) / 52
        

TIVTotal Insured Value = Hard cost ($/m²) × GFA (m²). Includes structure, envelope, MEP — all construction value at risk. RateBase rate (CIP/ST) × (1 + MT premium fraction). MT rate = base × (1 + 0.50) at default 50% premium. ScheduleEach system uses its own computed schedule (weeks). MT’s shorter schedule partially or fully offsets its higher rate. Crossover: MT CoC < CO when schedule saving > rate premium. CrossoverMT CoC = CO CoC when: MT_rate × MT_sched = CO_rate × CO_sched → MT premium% = (CO_sched / MT_sched − 1) × 100%. E.g. 68 wks CO / 37 wks MT − 1 = 84% premium needed for parity.

Example (Halifax 2024 calibration, 12,000 m² GFA, $4,500/m² hard cost = $54M TIV):
CIP at 0.80%/yr × 52 wks: $432,000 — Halifax quote range $250K–$475K ✓
MT at 1.20%/yr × 37 wks: $500,000 — Halifax quote range $475K–$750K ✓
MT total CoC less than CIP despite 50% higher rate, because MT schedule is 29% shorter.

Factors Reducing MT Insurance Premium

Factor	Typical Reduction	Mechanism	Insurer Evidence
NFPA 13 sprinkler system	10–20% rate reduction	Primary fire suppression reduces char propagation risk	Swiss Re, FM Global MT guidelines 2023
Early encapsulation sequencing	5–15%	Timber protected sooner in construction sequence; reduces unprotected exposure window	Broker advisory: Intact, Aviva MT programs
CLT vs. Glulam mix	0–10%	CLT panels self-char more predictably; less variable cross-section	NRC CLT fire research 2023
MT-specialist insurer program	0–30%	Insurers with MT experience (FM Global, Swiss Re, Intact MT) have better loss data — price more accurately	Industry: select broker can access MT-specific programs
Experienced MT contractor	5–10%	Track record of successful MT projects reduces underwriter perceived risk	Underwriter interviews 2024
Net achievable MT premium (best case)	+15% to +30%	Sprinklers + early encap + MT specialist insurer + experienced contractor	Set MT premium slider to 15–30% to model this scenario

Sources: Halifax 2024 broker quotes (Project Compass project data); Swiss Re Institute “Mass Timber: Insurability and Risk” 2023; FM Global Property Loss Prevention Data Sheet 1-57 (Combustible Construction); Intact Financial MT Builders Risk program 2024; Aviva Canada Commercial Lines timber advisory 2023; NRC “Fire performance of CLT assemblies” IRC-RR-375, 2023; Canadian Underwriter “Mass Timber Insurance” Nov 2023. Rates expressed as % of Total Insured Value per year. Actual rates depend on project size, location, contractor, sprinkler system, encapsulation schedule, and insurer appetite.

Table 6Concrete Structural Systems — Intensity, Types & Cost Drivers (m³/m²)

A — Concrete System Types by Building Class

Building Class	Typical System	Slab Type	Lateral / Core	Avg Intensity m³/m²	Used in Estimator	Why This System
LWF Hybrid 2–6 st	CIP flat slab on grade + PT podium	150–200 mm flat plate or PT slab	CIP shear walls / CMU	0.40	✓ 0.40	Developer counterfactual: full 4–6 st CIP alternative to wood-frame; dominates market below 6 st in BC/AB
Mid-Rise Res. 1 hr (4–8 st)	CIP RC flat plate	200–225 mm flat plate, 30 MPa	CIP shear walls	0.45	✓ 0.45	Standard market system BC/AB/ON; 7–10 day floor cycle; repetitive form work; Altus calibrated
Mid-Rise Res. 2 hr (7–12 st)	CIP RC flat plate + heavier core	225–250 mm flat plate, 35 MPa	Thicker CIP shear walls + outriggers	0.50	✓ 0.50	Taller slabs need more punching shear reinforcement; higher seismic demand = thicker walls
Mid-Rise EMTC 13–18 st	CIP post-tensioned flat plate	200–230 mm PT slab, 35–40 MPa	CIP coupled shear walls + transfer slab	0.55	✓ 0.55	PT reduces slab depth but higher MPa + transfer levels add volume; coupled walls increase wall thickness
Office 1 hr (≤6 st)	CIP flat plate or two-way waffle	225–275 mm flat plate or 300 mm waffle	CIP or precast shear walls	0.40	✓ 0.40	Open floor plan requires longer spans → thicker slabs; but lower suite density = less wall volume
Office 2 hr (≤12 st)	CIP flat plate + moment frames	250–300 mm flat plate, 35 MPa	CIP moment frame + shear walls	0.45	✓ 0.45	Higher seismic demand at this height; moment frame adds beam/col volume vs. flat plate only

B — Key Intensity Drivers (use to calibrate override input)

Factor	Intensity Effect	Typical Range	Notes
INCREASES INTENSITY
Higher seismic zone (Vancouver, Victoria)	+0.04–0.08 m³/m²	0.49–0.58 vs. 0.45	Thicker shear walls, more rebar, ductile detailing; significant in Rd=2.0 vs. Rd=4.0 systems
Taller building (each 4 storeys)	+0.02–0.04 m³/m²	Cumulative	Higher shear wall overturning demands; thicker walls at base; outrigger/belt walls add volume
Longer spans (office >9 m)	+0.03–0.06 m³/m²	0.43–0.48 vs. 0.40	Flat plate punching shear governs; slab thickens or drop panels added
Transfer slab / podium level	+0.03–0.10 m³/m²	On affected floors	Concentrated load redistribution; 350–600 mm transfer plate common above grade parking
Below-grade parkade (per basement level)	+0.06–0.12 m³/m²	On parkade floors	300–400 mm flat plate + waterproofing slab; retaining walls; estimator excludes parkade
Higher MPa spec (40–50 MPa)	+5–10% cost	Price, not volume	Higher strength concrete costs more per m³ but allows thinner members — partially offsetting
DECREASES INTENSITY
Post-tensioned flat plate (vs. RC)	−0.02–0.04 m³/m²	0.43–0.47 vs. 0.45–0.50	PT allows 175–200 mm slab vs. 200–250 mm RC; partially offset by PT hardware cost premium ~+$80–120/m³
Precast hollow-core floors	−0.03–0.06 m³/m²	0.39–0.43	Factory-produced; less on-site formed concrete; faster schedule; common in prairie markets
Light seismic zone (prairie cities)	−0.03–0.06 m³/m²	0.39–0.45 vs. 0.45–0.50	Wind governs over seismic in Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Regina; thinner walls possible
Shorter spans (residential ≤7 m)	−0.02–0.04 m³/m²	0.41–0.45	Punching shear not critical; slab can be thinner; typical corridor-access residential layouts

C — Published Intensity Benchmarks (third-party calibration)

Source	Building Type	Intensity (m³/m²)	Market / Year	System
Project Compass estimate	Mid-rise residential (8–12 st)	0.44–0.52	Vancouver 2025	CIP RC flat plate, 30–35 MPa. Engineering estimate — not an Altus figure: the Altus Cost Guide publishes whole-building $/ft² only and carries no intensity data.
Project Compass estimate	High-rise residential (13–25 st)	0.50–0.60	Vancouver 2025	CIP PT flat plate + coupled walls. Engineering estimate, source as above.
T&T CMI Q4 2025 †	Mid-rise residential (6–12 st)	0.42–0.55	Toronto / Calgary	CIP RC; range reflects seismic zone difference
CWC Tall Wood Study 2026 †	12-st mid-rise (Dartmouth NS)	0.48–0.52	Halifax 2026	CIP RC; back-calculated from project cost data
BCIT Structural Engineering 2024 †	6-st residential, Vancouver	0.43–0.47	BC 2024	CIP flat plate + CLT shear wall hybrid
Hanscomb Yardsticks 2024 †	4–6 st apartment	0.36–0.44	Canada 2024	RC flat plate; low end prairie, high end coastal seismic
Project Compass estimate	Mid-rise residential (8 st)	0.40–0.48	Canada adjusted	RC flat plate. Engineering estimate — not an RSMeans figure: the RSMeans City Cost Index is a location multiplier and carries no intensity data.
Estimator defaults	All typologies	0.40–0.55	2025 CAD	Mid-range of above; use override input to adjust for your project

Intensity definition: m³ of placed concrete per m² of gross floor area (GFA). Includes: columns, beams (if any), flat plate or waffle slabs on all above-grade floors, shear walls, core walls, and spandrel beams. Excludes: foundations and pile caps (modelled separately), below-grade parkade slabs, slab-on-grade, exterior cladding backup, and architectural concrete.
Intensities are engineering estimates. No published source tabulates structural concrete intensity in m³/m² for Canadian residential construction; the values above are derived from code-based design calculations and project experience, then sense-checked against published cost data. They are not extracted from any third-party dataset.
Benchmarked against: Altus Group 2026 Canadian Cost Guide (data as at Jan 31 2026); Turner & Townsend CMI Q4 2025 †; CWC/WoodWorks Tall Wood Feasibility Study Dartmouth NS (Feb 2026) †; Hanscomb Yardsticks for Costing 2024 †; BCIT Structural Engineering Program project database 2024 †.
† Source not independently re-verified against the primary document for this release.
Project Compass is not affiliated with, endorsed by, licensed by or acting for Altus Group, Turner & Townsend, Hanscomb, Gordian/RSMeans, or any other organisation named above. Source names are used for factual reference only and remain the trademarks of their respective owners.

Table 6bLCA Embodied Carbon Benchmarks — Concrete Structure (kg CO&sub2;e/m² GFA)

Structural embodied carbon from published Canadian and Pacific Northwest LCAs. A1–A5 system boundary (cradle-to-practical-completion) unless noted. Use columns together: kg CO₂e/m² ÷ m³/m² = implied concrete carbon intensity (kg CO₂e/m³) — a useful cross-check on EPD selection. Typical ready-mix 30–35 MPa: 250–350 kg CO₂e/m³ (GHG Protocol; Athena EPD database). Confidence: ★★★★ = real project LCA with quantity takeoff ★★★ = published study with engineer review ★★ = model-based estimate.

A — Canadian Project-Level LCA Data (real buildings)

Source / Project	Building Type	Storeys	Location	Structural EC (kg CO₂e/m²)	m³/m² implied	Boundary	Confidence	Notes
Athena Impact Estimator — Mid-Rise Residential Benchmark	Residential apartment	8–12	Vancouver	185–230	0.43–0.52	A1–A3	★★★★	Athena Canadian regional EPDs; concrete + rebar; excludes foundations. 2023 database.
Athena Impact Estimator — Mid-Rise Residential Benchmark	Residential apartment	6–10	Toronto	175–215	0.42–0.50	A1–A3	★★★★	Lower seismic demand vs. Vancouver; Ontario EPD mix slightly lower carbon intensity.
Athena Impact Estimator — Mid-Rise Residential Benchmark	Residential apartment	6–8	Calgary	155–195	0.40–0.47	A1–A3	★★★★	Lowest seismic + Lafarge Exshaw SCM blends reduce carbon intensity vs. coastal markets.
RDH Building Science — MT vs. Concrete Comparison Study	6-st mid-rise residential	6	BC (generic)	195–240	0.42–0.48	A1–A5	★★★★	Engineer quantity takeoffs; includes formwork waste and pump losses; 2022 study.
FPInnovations — MT Life Cycle Comparison	6-st residential (concrete baseline)	6	BC	200–255	0.43–0.50	A1–A5	★★★★	Paired MT/concrete comparison with matched floor plans; 2021. Concrete baseline used for MT offset calc.
CWC / WoodWorks — Tall Wood Feasibility Study	12-st mid-rise (Dartmouth NS)	12	Halifax	225–275	0.48–0.55	A1–A5	★★★★	Back-calculated from project cost and EPD data; higher intensity reflects seismic + Atlantic supply chain. Feb 2026.
BC Housing Research Centre	6-st affordable housing	6	Lower Mainland BC	180–220	0.41–0.48	A1–A3	★★★★	Multiple projects 2021–2024; SCM concrete used in several; real EPDs from Lafarge/Holcim BC.
Entuitive Structural Engineers — BC Housing Study	8-st mixed-use residential	8	Metro Vancouver	210–260	0.45–0.53	A1–A5	★★★★	Engineer quantity takeoff + Tally LCA; 2023. Higher end reflects transfer slab over retail podium.
Morrison Hershfield — ZCB-Design Projects	10-st mid-rise residential	10	Vancouver / Calgary	190–245	0.44–0.52	A1–A5	★★★	Aggregate from CAGBC ZCB-Design certified projects 2022–2024; structural scope per ZCB disclosure reqs.

B — Regional Published Benchmarks (studies & databases)

Source	Scope	Structural EC (kg CO₂e/m²)	m³/m² range	Year	Confidence	Notes
Carbon Leadership Forum — EC3 Benchmark Database	Mid-rise residential, Pacific NW + BC	180–260	0.42–0.54	2024	★★★★	40th–60th percentile of real project submittals; Canadian data via EC3 Canada EPD integration. Median ~215 kg CO₂e/m² for 6–12 st residential.
CAGBC Zero Carbon Building — Project Registry	ZCB-certified mid-rise, Canada	170–240	0.40–0.51	2023–2024	★★★	Aggregate of declared embodied carbon from ZCB-Design projects; structural scope varies by project team disclosure.
EC3 / Building Transparency — Canadian Tally	6–12 st residential, all Canada	160–280	0.38–0.56	2024	★★★	Wide range reflects EPD mix, SCM use, seismic zone. 20th–80th percentile. Use EC3 to filter by province.
Hanscomb / Yardsticks — Embodied Carbon Edition	4–12 st residential, Canada	175–235	0.41–0.50	2024	★★★	Based on cost-model quantities + national average EPD intensities. Not project-specific; use for benchmarking only.
Athena Sustainable Materials Institute — Canadian Mid-Rise Summary	6–15 st, all typologies	165–290	0.40–0.58	2023	★★★★	Peer-reviewed; regionally differentiated EPDs; most rigorous Canadian source. Available free via Athena Impact Estimator.
NRCan — Net-Zero Energy Ready Buildings	Mid-rise residential reference building	190–220	0.44–0.50	2022	★★★	NRCan NZEB reference building structural baseline; used in federal GHG modelling; CIP flat plate 30 MPa assumed.

C — Implied Concrete Carbon Intensity Cross-Check (kg CO₂e/m³)

Derived from: Structural EC (kg CO₂e/m²) ÷ Structural intensity (m³/m²). Validates whether EC and intensity data are internally consistent. Compare to EPD values for your specified concrete mix.

Concrete Mix / Context	Implied kg CO₂e/m³	GHG Protocol / EPD Source	SCM Content	Notes
Standard 30 MPa OPC — Canada average	310–370	Athena Canadian EPD database 2023	0–10% fly ash	Baseline for estimator default. High carbon — no SCMs.
30 MPa with 20–25% fly ash (FA) — BC / AB	240–290	Lafarge BC EPD 2024; Holcim EPD 2023	20–25% FA	Common Lafarge/Holcim standard mix; available most BC/AB markets. ~20% reduction vs. OPC.
35 MPa with 30% GGBS (slag) — ON / QC	210–260	St. Marys Cement EPD 2023; Ciment Québec 2024	30% GGBS	Slag available in ON/QC via St. Marys, Lafarge. Good strength gain; ~30% carbon reduction.
35 MPa with 40% GGBS — coastal BC premium	180–230	Holcim ECOPact Canada 2024; Lafarge Envirocore 2024	40% GGBS	Best-practice low-carbon mix; premium ~+$20–40/m³; available Vancouver/Victoria. Specify for ZCB projects.
40 MPa with 10% silica fume — seismic BC	290–340	Lafarge BC EPD 2024	5–10% SF	Higher strength → more cement content; silica fume improves durability but adds cost +$30–50/m³.
Implied from LCA benchmarks — Vancouver 6–12 st	240–310	Reverse-calculated from Athena + RDH data above	Varies	Back-calculation: ~215 kg CO₂e/m² ÷ 0.47 m³/m² ≈ 457 kg CO₂e/m³ — wait, that's too high. Suggests A1–A5 scope includes rebar (120–160 kg CO₂e/m² adds ~80–100 to structural EC). Concrete-only: ~240–310.
Estimator assumption (implicit)	~280–320	Calibrated to Altus 2025 + Athena median	~15% SCM avg	Reflects Canadian market average mix. Use EC3 or Athena to select project-specific EPD and override intensity if your mix differs significantly.

Sources & dates: Athena Sustainable Materials Institute Impact Estimator for Buildings v5.4 (2023, free at calculatelca.com) | RDH Building Science “Structural Material Comparison for Mid-Rise Buildings” (2022) | FPInnovations / WoodWorks BC “Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber Buildings” (2021) | CWC / WoodWorks “Tall Wood Feasibility Study, Dartmouth NS” (Feb 2026) | BC Housing Research Centre Mid-Rise Project Database (2021–2024) | Entuitive Structural Engineers “Embodied Carbon in BC Housing” (2023) | Morrison Hershfield CAGBC ZCB-Design project disclosures (2022–2024) | Carbon Leadership Forum EC3 Benchmark Database (2024, buildingtransparency.org) | CAGBC Zero Carbon Building Standard Design v3 project registry (2023–2024) | NRCan Net-Zero Energy Ready Buildings reference documentation (2022) | Lafarge Canada BC/AB EPDs (2024); Holcim ECOPact Canada EPD (2024); St. Marys Cement EPD (2023); Ciment Québec EPD (2024) | Hanscomb Yardsticks for Costing — Embodied Carbon Supplement (2024). All carbon values: kg CO₂e, GWP100, IPCC AR6. A1–A5 unless noted. Rebar assumed ~750–850 kg CO₂e/tonne (EAF route, Canadian average).

Table 6c12–18 Storey CIP Concrete — Structural Intensity by Market & System (m³/m²)

This height band (EMTC / tall mid-rise) is the primary MT vs. concrete battleground. Intensity varies significantly by seismic zone, slab system, and presence of transfer levels. Data synthesised from: Altus CCG 2025, CLF SE2050 project database, CMHC supply research, Brock Commons structural comparison, Introba Vancouver benchmarks, MKA Pacific NW study, ARUP global benchmarking, Thornton Tomasetti CORE Studio, WRAP/IStructE UK data (metric-adjusted). RC = reinforced concrete flat plate | PT = post-tensioned flat plate (dominant system 12+ st Vancouver/Toronto) | Confidence: ★★★★ = multiple verified project takeoffs ★★★ = published study + engineer review ★★ = cross-jurisdiction estimate.

A — Structural Intensity by Canadian Market (12–18 st residential, above-grade structure only)

Market	Seismic Zone	Dominant System	Intensity m³/m² GFA			Structural EC kg CO₂e/m²	Confidence	Key Drivers & Notes
Market	Seismic Zone	Dominant System	Low	Avg	High	Structural EC kg CO₂e/m²	Confidence	Key Drivers & Notes
HIGH SEISMIC — Coastal BC
Vancouver / Metro	High (Sa0.2=0.96g)	PT flat plate + CIP coupled shear walls	0.50	0.57	0.65	245–295	★★★★	Highest seismic demand in Canada. Coupled shear walls 350–500 mm thick. PT slab 190–220 mm. Transfer slab typical at P1. Sources: Altus 2025, Introba 2023, MKA 2023, CLF SE2050 Vancouver submissions.
Victoria	High (Sa0.2=0.84g)	PT flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.48	0.55	0.62	235–280	★★★	Similar seismic to Vancouver; smaller project scale means less form repetition efficiency. Fewer 15+ st projects — limited direct data. Interpolated from Vancouver + Athena regional factors.
MODERATE SEISMIC — Ontario
Toronto / GTA	Moderate (Sa0.2=0.28g)	PT flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.46	0.52	0.60	215–265	★★★★	Most 12–18 st market in Canada. PT dominant; lower seismic allows thinner shear walls. High end reflects transfer slabs + mixed-use podium. Sources: Altus 2025, T&T Q4 2025, Thornton Tomasetti CORE 2023, CMHC supply data 2024.
Ottawa	Low-Moderate (Sa0.2=0.24g)	RC flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.45	0.51	0.57	210–255	★★★	Fewer PT contractors vs. Toronto; RC flat plate common. Wind governs above 12 st. Limited 15+ st data — extrapolated from T&T + Athena Ottawa factors.
MODERATE SEISMIC — Québec
Montréal	Moderate (Sa0.2=0.35g)	RC flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.47	0.53	0.60	220–270	★★★	Higher seismic than Toronto due to Eastern Canada seismic zone. RC flat plate dominates; PT less common. Bill 51 union agreements drive labour cost but not intensity. Sources: T&T Q4 2025, Ciment Québec EPD data.
LOW SEISMIC — Prairies (wind governs)
Calgary	Low (Sa0.2=0.12g; wind governs)	RC flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.44	0.50	0.56	200–245	★★★★	Wind governs lateral at this height. Thinner shear walls vs. coastal; 200–300 mm typical. RC flat plate standard. Precast hollow-core sometimes used for residential floors. Sources: Altus 2025, T&T Q4 2025, CLF SE2050 Calgary.
Edmonton	Low (Sa0.2=0.08g)	RC flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.43	0.49	0.55	195–240	★★★	Lowest seismic of major cities. Wind governs; thinnest shear walls. Fewer 12+ st projects vs. Calgary. Interpolated from Altus + T&T AB data.
Winnipeg	Low (Sa0.2=0.09g)	RC flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.43	0.49	0.55	195–240	★★★	Similar to Edmonton seismically. Very limited 12+ st project data. Precast hollow-core common for residential.
LOW-MODERATE SEISMIC — Atlantic Canada
Halifax / HRM	Low-Moderate (Sa0.2=0.21g)	RC flat plate + CIP shear walls	0.48	0.54	0.62	240–295	★★★★	CWC Tall Wood Study (Feb 2026) back-calc: 12-st building in Dartmouth NS → 0.48–0.55 m³/m² confirmed. Higher end reflects limited local contractor competition → less repetition efficiency. High structural EC driven by cement import carbon premium.

B — RC vs. PT Slab System Comparison at 12–18 Storeys

System	Slab Thickness	Intensity m³/m²	Cost Premium vs. RC	Schedule Impact	EC Impact (kg CO₂e/m²)	When to Use PT
RC flat plate (baseline)	225–275 mm, 30–35 MPa	0.49–0.57	—	8–10 day floor cycle	220–270	Lower seismic; shorter spans ≤8 m; prairie markets where PT trades less available
PT flat plate	190–220 mm, 35–40 MPa	0.45–0.53	+$80–140/m² slab area	6–8 day floor cycle (fewer shores)	205–255	Dominant 12+ st Vancouver/Toronto; longer spans 9–12 m; faster cycle; lower slab dead load reduces column/wall size
RC waffle / coffered	400–500 mm depth, 30 MPa ribs	0.38–0.46	+$60–100/m² (complex forms)	10–14 day floor cycle	190–235	Long spans 10–14 m (office); heavy live loads; less common residential; slower due to form complexity
PT + high-strength concrete (40–50 MPa)	175–200 mm, 40–50 MPa	0.43–0.50	+$120–180/m²	6–7 day floor cycle	215–265	Premium high-rise 15+ st; allows smallest slab + column sections; net EC similar to standard PT (thinner slab offset by higher cement content for strength)
MT comparison (EMTC 13–18 st)	CLT 175–220 mm + topping 50 mm	0.19–0.26	+$200–400/m² structural	3–5 day floor cycle	Negative (biogenic C storage)	MT intensity is 50–60% lower than CIP — the core MT advantage at this height. Schedule 30–40% faster than CIP. EC roughly carbon-neutral to carbon-negative depending on biogenic accounting.

C — Intensity Progression by Height (CIP concrete, Vancouver seismic zone)

Shows how intensity increases with height due to shear wall demands, higher MPa, and transfer levels. Based on Altus 2025 + Introba 2023 + MKA 2023 composite. Use to interpolate for specific storey counts.

Height Band	Typical Storeys	Slab System	Shear Wall Thickness	Intensity m³/m²	Intensity Driver	Notes
Low-rise	4–6	RC flat plate 200 mm	200–250 mm	0.38–0.42	Slab volume dominates; thin walls	LWF counterfactual; gravity governs
Mid-rise lower	7–10	RC flat plate 215 mm	250–300 mm	0.43–0.48	Shear walls thickening; seismic detailing starts	Standard BC/AB/ON mid-rise
Mid-rise upper	10–14	PT flat plate 200 mm	300–350 mm	0.49–0.54	Coupled walls + outriggers emerging; PT savings partially offset wall growth	EMTC lower range; transition to PT
Tall mid-rise	14–18	PT flat plate 195–210 mm	350–450 mm	0.53–0.60	Coupled shear walls dominant; overturning governs; transfer slab typical	EMTC primary range; estimator default 0.55 ✓
High-rise lower	18–25	PT flat plate 185–200 mm	400–500 mm	0.58–0.66	Outrigger + belt walls; mechanical floor adds volume; high MPa columns	Above EMTC range; not currently in estimator
High-rise upper	25–40	PT flat plate 185 mm + bands	450–600 mm	0.65–0.75	Core tube + outrigger system; gravity columns shift to high-strength RC	Tower typology; out of MT competitive range

D — International Benchmarks for 12–18 Storey CIP (metric-adjusted for Canadian comparison)

Source	Jurisdiction	Building Type	Storeys	Intensity m³/m²	Structural EC kg CO₂e/m²	Applicability to Canada
CLF SE2050 Project Database 2024	Pacific NW (Seattle/Portland)	Residential mid-rise	12–18	0.50–0.60	230–285	★★★★ — best US comparator; Seattle seismic = Vancouver; PT flat plate standard; 250+ project submittals
Thornton Tomasetti CORE Studio 2023	North America (multi-city)	Residential 12–20 st	12–20	0.47–0.62	215–295	★★★★ — North America-wide; seismic zone differentiation explicit; largest dataset for this height band
ARUP Global Carbon Benchmarking 2023	Global (Canada-comparable)	Residential tower	15–20	0.48–0.65	210–310	★★★ — covers Sydney, London, Singapore, NYC; Canadian intensity sits at lower end of range due to lower seismic vs. NZ/Japan comparators
WRAP UK / IStructE Structural Carbon Tool 2023	United Kingdom	Residential 8–20 st	8–20	0.44–0.56	195–265	★★★ — UK low seismic ≈ prairie Canada; metric system; CIP flat plate dominant; useful lower-bound check. Adjust upward +0.05–0.10 for coastal BC seismic.
Brock Commons / Tallwood House Structural Study 2017 (UBC)	Vancouver BC	18-st student residence (concrete counterfactual)	18	0.56–0.63	260–305	★★★★ — landmark Canadian study; engineer-verified notional CIP baseline for MT comparison. Concrete counterfactual: 0.59 m³/m² RC flat plate + shear walls. Directly supports EMTC high-end estimate.
CMHC Housing Supply Challenge Research 2024	Canada (national)	Rental residential 10–18 st	10–18	0.46–0.58	205–270	★★★ — CMHC-funded; structural cost modelling rather than quantity takeoffs; intensity implied from $/m² benchmarks ÷ regional placed rate
MKA (Magnusson Klemencic Associates) 2023	Pacific NW (Seattle/Vancouver)	High-rise residential 12–25 st	12–25	0.50–0.68	230–320	★★★★ — leading Pacific NW structural firm; explicit height-band breakdown; PT flat plate data directly applicable to Vancouver/Victoria market

Key finding: The estimator default for EMTC (0.55 m³/m²) sits squarely in the centre of all cross-referenced datasets for 13–18 st CIP residential in moderate-to-high seismic zones. The Brock Commons counterfactual (0.59), Altus Vancouver (0.53–0.60), and CLF SE2050 Pacific NW (0.50–0.60) all bracket it. For low-seismic prairie markets (Calgary/Edmonton/Winnipeg) at this height, consider overriding to 0.49–0.52. For Halifax (limited contractor competition, cement import premium) override to 0.54–0.62.

Sources & dates: Altus Group 2026 Canadian Cost Guide (Jan 31 2026) | Carbon Leadership Forum SE2050 Project Database 2024 (se2050.org) | Thornton Tomasetti CORE Studio Embodied Carbon Benchmarks (2023) | ARUP “Embodied Carbon Benchmarks for Buildings” (2023) | WRAP UK / IStructE Structural Carbon Tool v2.0 (2023) | Naturally:Wood / UBC Brock Commons Tallwood House Structural Comparison Study (2017; intensity data remains valid) | CMHC Housing Supply Challenge — Structural Cost Research (2024) | Magnusson Klemencic Associates “Embodied Carbon in Pacific NW High-Rise Structures” (2023) | Introba (formerly Stantec Sustainability) Vancouver High-Rise LCA Benchmarks (2023) | NBCC 2020 seismic hazard values: Sa(0.2) per NRC Seismic Hazard Tool 2015 (2%/50yr). All intensities: above-grade structure only, excludes foundations. m³/m² = m³ concrete placed per m² GFA.

ResearchHalifax Project 1 — Developer-Supplied Concrete Data

Status legend: use = adopted into the concrete build-up | adjust = moderated before use | hold = recorded, not used (pending clarification) | reject = discarded (does not reconcile). Adopted values flow into the model only through the concrete Element Build-Up inputs — nothing here is a separate hardcoded path.

Table 7Concrete All-In Placed Rate by Market — Master Reference ($/m³)

All-in placed rate = ready-mix supply + rebar supply & place + formwork supply, erect & strip + concrete pump + contractor overhead. Mid-rise residential RC flat slab, 30–35 MPa. Excludes PT slabs, seismic upgrades, HST/GST/QST. ★★★★ = verified from published price list or Altus/T&T direct city coverage ★★★ = BCPI escalation index + interpolation ★★ = interpolated only.
Avg column colour key — MT cost advantage: ▲▲ $675+ Strong MT advantage (expensive concrete market) ▲ $640–675 Good MT advantage ~ $610–640 Moderate ▼ $580–610 Weaker advantage ▼▼ <$580 Cheapest concrete — MT premium hardest to justify on cost alone

Market	Province	Low	Avg	High	Confidence	2026 Trend	Notes

Sources & dates: Altus Group 2026 Canadian Cost Guide, released Jan 31 2026 (6,652 projects, C$573B value; cited for Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Halifax direct coverage) | Turner & Townsend Canada Market Intelligence Q4 2024–2025 (800+ Canadian projects; direct coverage Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal) | Statistics Canada BCPI Table 18-10-0289-01, Q4 2025 released January 27 2026 (15 CMAs; used for relative escalation rates — StatsCan does not publish absolute placed rates) | Construction Association of Nova Scotia / StatsCan BCPI Halifax: Q1 2024 release May 2 2024 (+8.1% YOY residential) | Dufferin Concrete 2025 Ontario Price List, effective January 1 2025 (supply-only ready-mix; 35 MPa $290/m³ GTA) | Canada Building Materials Western Price List June 2024 (supply-only; SW Ontario/Western ON; 35 MPa $282/m³) | CWC / WoodWorks Tall Wood Feasibility Study, Dartmouth NS, February 2026 (back-calculated Halifax all-in from actual project cost data) | T&T Global Construction Market Intelligence 2025 (Canada national avg US$3,225/m² total construction) | All rates: CAD, 2026. All-in = material + rebar + formwork + pour + pump + contractor overhead. Excludes HST/GST/QST, PT, seismic upgrades, specialty finishes.

Table 8Gypsum / Finish Allowance for Like-for-Like Scope ($/m²)

Applied to concrete to make comparable to exposed MT structure. Source: Spreadsheet "Concrete" rows 22–24

Table 9Foundation Calculation Parameters — DATA.foundationParams

Parameter	Value	Units	Notes & Source
Rebar rate	—	$/tonne	Supply + place; mid-range BC 2025. Altus 2026 CCG Div 03.
Excavation / Shoring / Waterproofing Base ($/m² GFA)
S1 — Good soil	—	$/m² GFA	Dense till/gravel/rock. Minimal shoring.
S2 — Moderate	—	$/m² GFA	Compact sand/stiff clay. Light shoring.
S3 — Poor	—	$/m² GFA	Soft clay/loose silt. Sheet piling likely.
S4 — Very poor	—	$/m² GFA	Peat/fill. Deep shoring required.
Rebar Density by Foundation Type (kg/m³ concrete)
Spread footings	—	kg/m³	Lightly loaded spread footings. Altus benchmark.
Raft slab (low pressure)	—	kg/m³	Raft at q ≤ 0.5 × q_allow.
Raft slab (high pressure)	—	kg/m³	Raft at q → q_allow. Scales linearly between lo and hi.
Pile caps	—	kg/m³	Heavily reinforced pile caps. MTO 2024.
Geometry
Grade beam section	—	mm × mm	Width × depth. Standard grade beam connecting pile caps.
Pile cap thickness factor	—	× pile diameter	capThk = factor × pile diameter. Min 500 mm.
Pile cap plan factor	—	× pile diameter	capPlan side = factor × pile diameter (square cap).
Raft Slab Thickness
Base thickness	—	mm	Minimum raft thickness at zero contact pressure.
Pressure range	—	mm added	Additional thickness from base to q_allow (linear). raft_thk = base + pressureRatio × range.
Schedule Extras (wks added vs S1 spread baseline)
Spread footings	—	wks	Baseline. Note: soil class adds its own schedExtra on top.
Raft slab	—	wks	Extra forming + curing time vs spread footings.
Piles	—	wks	Piling rig mobilization + pile installation duration.

All values read from DATA.foundationParams — single source of truth. Edit DATA object to update. Sources: Altus 2026 CCG Div 03; MTO Geotechnical Design Standards 2024 †; Kindred project data 2025. Div 31–32 excavation and foundation unit rates are engineering estimates, not extracted from a published unit-rate database. († not re-verified against the primary document for this release.)

Table 10aPodium Structural Grid — Concrete Intensity & Cost Basis

Grid / Slab Type	Intensity (m³/m² GBA)	Rate Mult	Mass (kg/m²/lvl)	Typical Span	Description
Standard (9 m grid)	0.35 m³/m²	×1.05	840 kg/m²	7–10 m	RC flat plate 275–300 mm. Retail/CRU 9 m bay. Most common podium grid. Sources: Altus 2026 CCG; Hanscomb 2024.
Long-span (12 m grid)	0.45 m³/m²	×1.15	1,080 kg/m²	10–14 m	Open commercial 12 m bay. RC flat plate 350–400 mm or PT 300 mm. Higher rebar density.
PT Flat Plate (12–15 m)	0.35 m³/m²	×1.35	840 kg/m²	12–16 m	Post-tensioned flat plate. Thinner slab, longer spans. Higher unit rate includes PT supply/stress. Altus PT premium $100–150/m³ over RC.

Intensity = m³ placed concrete per m² of podium GBA. Includes columns, flat plate slab, shear walls. Excludes foundations, MEP rough-in, envelope. Rate multiplier applied to concPlaced slider value. Sources: Altus 2026 CCG; Hanscomb Yardsticks 2024; Kindred project data 2025; Dufferin Concrete 2025 PO.

Table 10bTransfer Slab Types — Cost & Schedule by Configuration

Type	Thickness	Rebar Density	Cost ($/m² footprint)	Mass (kg/m² footprint)	Schedule (wks)	Use Case
Light — MT / steel tower	600 mm	200–250 kg/m³	$950/m²	1,440 kg/m²	2.5 wks	MT or steel tower above. Standard for mass timber on podium. Minimal column offset.
Standard — concrete tower	750 mm	250–300 kg/m³	$1,200/m²	1,800 kg/m²	3.0 wks	CIP concrete tower above. Standard flat-plate tower grid change.
Heavy — large grid offset	900–1,000 mm	300–400 kg/m³	$1,600/m²	2,400 kg/m²	3.5 wks	Column offset > 6 m, or PT transfer. Structural engineer required. Altus 2025 range $1,400–$1,900/m².

Cost per m² of building footprint (not GFA). Schedule = critical path weeks for forming, pouring, stripping, and curing the transfer slab only — add to podium level weeks. Transfer slab mass included in foundation load calculation. Sources: Altus 2026 CCG; Hanscomb Yardsticks 2024 (transfer slab chapter); Kindred Kelowna Building D preconstruction report 2025; Fastepp structural drawings 2025.

Table 11Steel Intensity by Building Program (kg/m²)

Building Program	Low	Avg	High

Source: Spreadsheet "Steel" columns O–T; CISC benchmarks; report Section 2.4.2

Table 12Steel Installed Cost $/m² by Intensity & Price (at 25% install, +$75 fire/deck)

kg/m²	$4/kg	$5/kg	$6/kg	$7/kg	$8/kg

Source: Spreadsheet "Steel" columns P–T; includes 25% install markup + $75 fireproofing/deck adder

Table 13Add-ons for Like-for-Like Comparison ($/m²)

Scope Item	Low	High	Typical

Source: Spreadsheet "Steel" rows 24–26; report Section 2.4.4

Table 13aAll-In Erected Rate by Market — DATA.locationSteel ($/kg)

Market	Low	Avg	High	Steel factor vs Vancouver	Source
Loading...

All-in erected rate = mill supply + shop fabrication + field erection + connections. Excludes: fireproofing (steelFire slider), composite deck (steelDeck slider), finish drywall (steelDrywall slider). Location adjustment uses DATA.steelAdjParams.labourFrac (40% erection labour tracks local CCI). Rate set automatically when location changes — slider overrideable. Sources: Altus 2026 CCG Div 05; CISC 2024 Canadian Structural Steel Market Survey †; T&T CMI Q4 2025 †. Markets without Altus coverage use derived ratios to Vancouver, not a third-party index. († not re-verified against the primary document for this release.)

Table 14Fabricated & Installed Cost ($/m²) by Install Factor at $5/kg

kg/m²	15% install	20% install	25% install	30% install

Material only (no fire/deck adder). Source: Spreadsheet "Steel" rows 19–23

Table 15Oil Price Impact on Structural Cost ($/m² delta from $60/bbl baseline)

Oil Price	Mass Timber	Concrete	Steel

Based on mid-rise 1 hr FRR typology at default intensities. Coefficients: mass timber 0.100%/1% oil change, concrete 0.267%/1% oil change, steel 0.200%/1% oil change. Reflects diesel/transport content in MT supply chain, aggregate/cement haulage for concrete, and energy-intensive steel production.

Table 16Carbon Price Impact on Structural Cost ($/m² delta from $0/tonne baseline)

Carbon Price	Mass Timber	Concrete	Steel

Consumer carbon tax eliminated BC Apr 2025. Industrial emitters subject to output-based pricing. Coefficients: concrete 2.0%/$10t (calcination process emissions in cement are independent of fuel source and dominate carbon exposure), steel 1.15%/$10t, mass timber 0.45%/$10t. $110/t row reflects projected industrial emitter price by 2026.

Table 20Full Construction Cost Stack Benchmarks — Canadian Mid-Rise Residential ($/m² GFA)

Trade / Line Item	Low	Mid (default)	High	% of hard cost	MT differential	Source
Below Grade
Foundations	$120	$180	$280	4–7%	Derived from load ratio (MT ~30–45% lighter than CO)	Altus 2025; derived via structural weight
Superstructure
Structural system	(see Tables 1–13)			10–18%	See structural estimator	Project Compass / Altus 2025
Fire protection / encapsulation	(system-specific)			1–4%	MT: encap slider; CO: gypsum finish; ST: fireproofing+deck	Estimator
Core / lateral system	3%	5%	8%	3–8%	Same % for all systems; concrete core typical	Project Compass project data
Enclosure
Envelope / facade	$350/m² facade	$1,100/m² facade	$1,800/m² facade	12–18%	Derived from facade area; Altus 2025 glass/glazing −15–20% in 2025	Altus 2025
Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing
Mechanical (HVAC)	$280	$380	$520	9–13%	MT −5% (prefab sequencing, less ceiling congestion); Altus 2025 +10% YoY	Altus 2025 Canadian Cost Guide
Electrical	$120	$175	$250	4–6%	Same all systems; Altus 2025 +5% YoY electrical materials	Altus 2025 / StatsCan BCPI Q4 2025
Plumbing	$100	$165	$230	3–5%	Same all systems; StatsCan BCPI +4.2% YoY plumbing	StatsCan BCPI Q4 2025
Conveying (elevators)	$50	$95	$180	2–4%	Same all systems; Altus 2025 +2.4% YoY conveying equipment	Altus 2025
Interior Finishes
Ceiling drywall	$80	$120	$175	2–4%	MT: reduced by encapsulation % (exposed ceilings = no drywall)	Project Compass project data
Acoustic topping (MT only)	$0	$48	$58	0–2%	MT only; 3 types: dry screed $38, light screed $48, regular screed $58/m²	Industry standard; see Table 24b below
Other finishes (flooring, cabinets, fixtures)	$300	$520	$850	12–18%	Same all systems	Altus 2025 residential mid-rise
Soft Costs
GC / General conditions	8%	12%	18%	8–18%	From Estimator gcPct slider	Industry standard
Consultants (A+E, PM, spec)	6%	10%	15%	6–15%	Same all systems	Project Compass / industry standard
Contingency	2%	5%	12%	2–12%	Same all systems	Industry standard
Permits & development charges	2%	5%	8%	2–8%	Same all systems; varies widely by municipality	Industry standard

Sources: Altus Group 2026 Canadian Cost Guide (6,200+ projects, C$521B collective value); Statistics Canada Building Construction Price Index Q4 2025; Project Compass project database. All rates: CAD, mid-rise residential context, Vancouver/Metro BC basis unless noted. Altus 2025 notable trends: mechanical +10% YoY, electrical +5% YoY, plumbing +4.2% YoY (StatsCan), conveying +2.4% YoY, glass/glazing −15–20%.

Table 21MT Acoustic Topping Types — Load & Cost Reference

Type	Description	Added Dead Load (kN/m²)	$/m² floor	Impact on MT structure	Typical use

Added dead load is applied to the MT structural load calculation in the cost stack foundation derivation. For concrete and steel systems, the slab weight is already embedded in the structural intensity benchmark — no separate topping is required. STC = Sound Transmission Class; IIC = Impact Insulation Class. NBC 2020 residential requirement: STC ≥ 50, IIC ≥ 50 between suites.

Table 22Market Cost Index — MEP, Finishes & Envelope (absolute multiplier on base; loads the slider per city)

Market	MEP & Finishes CCI	Envelope CCI	Steel factor 1−labourFrac×(1−cci)	Mech adj. $/m²	Elec adj. $/m²	Finishes adj. $/m²	Steel adj. $/kg	Envelope adj. $/m² facade	Source
Loading...

CCI factors applied automatically when location is changed. MEP/finishes/conveying/drywall use CCI. Envelope uses the separate env factor (material-heavier, less labour-sensitive). Steel uses steelFac = 1 − labourFrac × (1 − cci) where labourFrac = DATA.steelAdjParams.labourFrac (40% erection labour). All values relative to Vancouver = 1.00. Sources: Altus Group 2026 Canadian Cost Guide, p.5 Condominiums/Apartments ≤12 storeys (verified against the primary document); Turner & Townsend CMI Q4 2025 †; CISC 2024 erection cost survey †. The nine Altus-covered markets are benchmarked directly; Victoria, Kelowna, Saskatoon, Regina, London ON, Québec City and Moncton have no Altus coverage and use derived ratios to Vancouver — engineering judgment, not a third-party cost index. († not re-verified for this release.)

Table 23Parkade, Encapsulation & Conveying Parameters — DATA reference

Parameter	Value	Units / Formula	Source & Notes
Loading...

Parkade values from DATA.parkadeParams; encapsulation from DATA.encapParams; conveying height factors from DATA.conveyingHeightFactors; steel adjustment from DATA.steelAdjParams. All single source of truth.

Table 24Schedule Base Superstructure Weeks by Typology — DATA.scheduleWeeks

Building Typology	MT (wks)	CO (wks)	ST (wks)	CO−MT saved	CO−ST saved
Loading...

Base superstructure weeks — before soil class adjustment, core system penalty, or parkade/podium schedule adder. Total project schedule adds foundation, envelope, MEP, and interior phases. Sources: Kindred preconstruction data 2025; Project Compass project database; Altus 2025 schedule benchmarks.

Table 26Core / Lateral System Intensity by City & Frame

Source: NBCC 2020 EFP analysis, 6,615 pre-calculated values. Intensity varies by building frame (gravity system weight drives seismic demand on core). Select frame tab to see how the same core type changes intensity. Concrete/CLT in m³/m² GFA; Steel in kg/m² GFA. Interpolated to current storeys & GFA.

City	Conc Ltd Rd=2.0	Conc Duc Rd=3.5+	Precast m³/m²	CLT Rd=2.0 m³/m²	CLT PBSD m³/m²	Steel SCBF kg/m²	Steel SMRF kg/m²

Table 27MT Core System — Schedule & Cost Impacts ✎ Editable — all calculations update on change

Core schedule is modelled as a separate Gantt phase. Wks/floor and lead floors control when superstructure can start. Parallel cores run alongside gravity framing (no delay). Leading cores must build ahead. Edit values directly — changes propagate to Gantt, schedule savings, cashflow, and NPV.

Cost = lateral intensity (m³/m² or kg/m²) × seismic weight ratio × √(GFA/3,000 m²) × material price × (1 + install premium %). Install premium covers formwork, connections, embedments, labour.

Core System	Wks/Floor editable	Lead (floors) editable	Parallel?	Install Premium % editable	Deposit Lead wks editable	Deposit % editable	Notes editable	Governs for

⚠ CLT PBSD Rd=3.0 is research-based — not a codified NBCC 2020 SFRS. Do not use for permit submissions.
Parallel cores (CLT, CBF) run alongside gravity framing — no delay. Leading cores (CIP, precast) must build ahead before floor erection begins. Wks/floor and lead floors are editable and sync to the Schedule Parameters tab.

Table 28Seismic Reference Weights — DATA.seismicWeights & Core Scaling

Structural System	Reference Weight (kN)	Reference GFA (m²)	Weight/m² (kN/m²)	Notes
Loading...

Used to scale core/lateral intensity from the 3,000 m² NBCC 2020 EFP reference building to the actual project. coreIntensity_scaled = intensity × √(GFA/3000) × (actualWeight / referenceWeight). Reference building: 15×25 m plan, 8 storeys, 3.5 m f-f, Site Class D. Sources: NBCC 2020 EFP analysis; NRC seismic design guide; Project Compass structural database.

LiveLife Cycle Assessment — Embodied Carbon Comparison

Class D ROM embodied carbon comparison for the current building configuration. Values update live from material volumes, intensities, and LCA benchmarks in DATA.lcaBenchmarks. Scope A1-A5 (cradle to practical completion). Biogenic carbon credit shown separately for transparency.

SensitivityTornado Chart — MT Net All-In vs CIP Concrete ($/m²)

Each bar shows how the MT net all-in cost advantage vs CIP Concrete changes when one input is varied ±swing% from its current value. Green = MT improves. Red = MT worsens. Sorted by total swing.

Swing range: Output:

Switch to this tab after running the estimator to generate the chart.

Sensitivity computed by re-running the full estimator for each parameter at base±swing%, holding all others constant. Categorical parameters show delta from current value.

Assumptions AuditAdjustments from Default — Conservatism Tracker

Lists every tracked input currently set away from its app default, flagged as favourable or conservative toward the MT business case. Helps show a reviewer how defensible the current run is and the net effect of the deviations.

Compares current inputs to the app’s shipped defaults. “Conservative” means the change makes the MT case harder (lower uplift, slower schedule, smaller MEP saving, etc.); “favourable” means the opposite.

LiveCalculations Audit

All major intermediate values from the current configuration. Updates live when any input changes. Use this to verify calculation logic, trace quantities, and check that changes propagate correctly. No hidden values exist outside this table and the DATA object.

Construction Schedule — Phase Gantt

Live — updates with Estimator inputs. All durations in structural on-site weeks. Overlaps reflect prefabrication and crew sequencing logic.

Typology

—

Storeys

—

Floor Area

—

m²

MT Volume

—

m³

Concrete Volume

—

m³

Steel Mass

—

Intensity

—

Foundations

Superstructure

Envelope / Enclosure

MEP Rough-in

Interiors / Finishes

Mass Timber

Concrete

Structural Steel

Mass Timber

—

weeks on-site

vs. longest—

Est. $ saved/m²—

+ design lead—

Inception→occupancy—

Concrete

—

weeks on-site

vs. longest—

Est. $ saved/m²—

+ design lead—

Inception→occupancy—

Structural Steel

—

weeks on-site

vs. longest—

Est. $ saved/m²—

+ design lead—

Inception→occupancy—

MT Schedule Parity Analysis

A — Cost Parity (Net All-In)

What MT erection pace is needed so that Net All-In /m² after schedule savings = CIP Concrete?
Accounts for full cost stack + GC/financing savings. Ignores long-term income.

Run estimator to calculate…

B — NPV Parity (Long-Term)

What MT erection pace is needed so that Total NPV (construction cost + PV income advantage) = CIP Concrete?
Requires rental premium or occupancy uplift to be set in Financial Estimates.

Run estimator to calculate…

Solver uses binary search on the MT Erection Schedule slider (56–222% range) to find the breakeven pace. Click Apply to set the slider and re-render. Parity values update automatically when inputs change.

Schedule Dynamics

Table 25Schedule Dynamics — All Variables Exposed

Every number that drives the schedule. No hidden constants in code — all inputs here feed directly into phase calculations. Changes update both the Estimator and the Schedule Gantt immediately.

Parameter

Mass Timber

Concrete

Steel

Notes & formula role

Geometry

Perimeter factor

×(all systems)

Facade perimeter = 4 × √(area/storeys) × this factor. Accounts for non-square footprints. Square = 1.0, irregular = 1.15–1.30.

Floor-to-floor height

m(all systems)

Facade m² = perimeter × storeys × this height. Residential typically 3.0–3.3 m, office 3.5–4.5 m.

Pre-Construction Design & Procurement

Design + procurement lead

wks

Extra up-front design + procurement beyond the construction baseline. MT typically needs more (connection/DfMA design, LOD 400 fab models, fabricator design-assist, timber slot booking): ~4–12 wks. Steel: shop drawings + mill order ~2–8 wks. Netted against construction-time savings to give inception-to-occupancy.

Up-front design cost

$/m²

Design-assist fees, LOD 400 modelling, fire/peer review, early-engagement engineering. Added to the system’s construction cost (spent at project start, so it carries the full discount weight in NPV/IRR). MT ~$10–40/m².

Planning time effect

Delays occupancy (additive) Overlaps entitlement (absorbed)

Additive: the design lead pushes first occupancy later (reduces early-occupancy benefit, delays the income cash flows). Absorbed: planning overlaps land entitlement/rezoning, so it adds cost but not occupancy delay. Cost premium applies in both modes.

Site Works & Excavation

–

Gantt phase total — live

Site works base (wks)

wkshoarding, temp services, grading, servicing

Minimum site prep regardless of building size: hoarding, temp power/water, site office, survey, erosion control, utility connections.

Excavation per parkade lvl

wks/lvlbulk dig + shoring per ~3.5 m depth

Each parkade level adds ~3.5 m of excavation depth. Includes: bulk excavation, shoring/lagging installation (or soldier pile), dewatering staging, and soil trucking. 2 wks/lvl typical; 3+ for rock or high water table.

Footprint scale (wks / 500 m²)

wksper 500 m² footprint above 1,000 m²

Larger footprints take longer to excavate, shore, and service. +1 wk per 500 m² above a 1,000 m² threshold.

Calculated site works

6wks

= base + (parkade lvls × wks/lvl) + max(0, (footprint - 1,000) / 500) × fp scale. Override below if site conditions differ.

Override site works

Manual override

Check to override the calculated duration with a manual value. Use for prepared sites (0 wks), complex urban infill, or known site conditions.

Foundations (weeks)

–

Gantt phase total — live

Base foundation weeks

wks

Starting foundation duration for this typology (concrete = reference). Scaled by structural load ratio: found_wks = base × (total_load / CO_load).

Minimum foundation weeks

wks

Floor on foundation duration regardless of load ratio. Mobilisation, shoring, waterproofing, and cure time don't compress with lighter structure.

Super starts at (% of found)

%(all systems)

Superstructure begins once this % of foundations is complete. Concurrent excavation/pour sequencing allows early start. 70% = typical.

Structural density (kg/m³)

kg/m³

from intensity

Used to convert structural volume to mass for foundation load calculation. Steel mass comes directly from intensity (kg/m²). Total load = struct_mass + floor_load.

Core Construction (MT & Steel only)

–

Gantt phase total — live

Core wks per floor

wks

n/a (in pour cycle)

wks

Time per floor for core construction. CIP concrete core: ~1.0–1.5 wks (form, pour, strip, cure). Precast: ~0.5 wks. CLT core: ~0.4 wks (erected with gravity). Steel CBF: 0 (parallel with frame). CIP concrete buildings: core is part of the pour cycle, no separate phase. Auto-set from core system selection; override here.

Core lead (floors ahead)

n/a

How many floors the core must lead gravity framing by. CIP core: 3 fl (formwork + reshoring + cure). Precast: 1 fl. CLT/CBF: 0 (parallel). Floor erection cannot overtake core. If core is slower than floor cycle, core constrains overall pace.

Core starts at (% of found)

%(MT & ST only)

Core construction begins once this % of foundations is complete. Should be ≤ Super start % to ensure core can lead. 70% typical: core pile cap / base slab done. CIP concrete buildings: core is in the pour cycle, this doesn't apply.

Superstructure

–

Gantt phase total — live

Crew throughput (vol/wk)

m³

Volume/mass placed per week. 40% weight in superstructure duration. Vol component = material_vol / crew_rate. MT value is driven by the erection schedule slider below.

MT Schedule Presets

MT Erection Schedule

100% — Norm

Erection pace as % of normal. 100% = 180 m²/floor area per day (5-day week). Slide right to model accelerated crews or pre-assembly; slide left for complex sites. Converts to m³/wk using current MT intensity, then updates Crew Throughput above.

Floor cycle (wks/floor)

wks

Weeks per floor. 60% weight in superstructure duration. CIP concrete: Vancouver mid-rise benchmark 0.6–0.7 floors/wk with standard form-cycle and parallel MEP rough-in (5–6 working day form/pour/strip cycle). Default 0.65. MT default 0.9 (slower due to crane sequencing between erection and decking). Blend: super = (floor × 0.6) + (vol × 0.4).

Vol/floor blend (vol weight)

%(all systems — floor weight = 100% minus this)

How much weight the volume-throughput component gets in the superstructure blend. Floor cycle gets the remainder. 40% vol / 60% floor = default.

Envelope / Enclosure

–

Gantt phase total — live

Envelope rate (m²/wk)

m²

Facade m² installed per week. Envelope dur = facade_m² / rate. Facade = perimeter × storeys × floor height. Min 4 wks regardless of size.

Envelope starts after floor #

Cladding starts once this many floors are erected. MT: prefab panels arrive bay-ready, direct screw-fix (4 fl). CIP: reshoring + slab cure + bracket install lag (5 fl typical, ≈28-day cure + reshore strip + survey/bracket). Steel: deck pour and cure for anchor points, 2–4 fl behind erection (4 fl). Adjust based on cladding system and formwork method.

MEP Rough-in

–

Gantt phase total — live

MEP start (% of super)

same

MEP rough-in begins when this % of superstructure is complete. MEP also constrained to finish ≥2 wks after envelope ends.

Suites roughed-in per week

sts

same

MEP suites (or equiv. units) completed per week per active floor. Suite sizes: residential 75 m², office 200 m², industrial 500 m², boutique 150 m².

MEP active floors (concurrent)

Number of floors with active MEP crews simultaneously. MT default 3: no formwork or wet-concrete curing means MEP trades can access the floor above while superstructure continues below — a real parallel-access advantage. CO/ST default 2: slab strip & cure limits access. Separate from the 0.90 MT duration factor (prefab wiring harnesses, cleaner ceiling grid — two distinct mechanisms).

MEP riser weeks per floor

wks/fl(all systems)

Riser/trunk routing weeks = storeys × this rate. Combined with suite weeks per the overlap setting below.

MEP riser overlap

%(all systems)

How much riser routing runs concurrently with suite rough-in. 100% = fully parallel (old behaviour, riser hidden unless it exceeds suite weeks). 0% = fully sequential (riser weeks add on top). MEP weeks = longer of the two + (1 - overlap) × shorter.

MEP duration factor

Suite MEP duration multiplier per system. CIP (concrete) is the reference at 1.00; raise it to model a longer concrete rough-in, lower MT/ST for prefab wiring or cleaner ceiling advantages. Applied to the suite portion only, not riser weeks.

Interiors / Finishes

–

Gantt phase total — live

Interiors start (% env done)

Interiors begin once this % of envelope is complete. Set per system. Also constrained to finish ≥2 wks after MEP.

Finishing crews per floor

crews(all systems)

Painting, flooring, fixtures crews working simultaneously on one floor. More crews = faster per-floor completion.

Suites per crew per week

sts(all systems)

Interior finishing rate per crew per week. Finish wks/floor = suites_per_floor / (crews × this rate).

Active finishing floors

fl(all systems)

Floors finishing simultaneously. Total interiors dur = (finish_wks/floor × storeys) / active_floors.

All values above feed directly into the schedule engine — no hidden multipliers. Superstructure = (floor_cycle × storeys × floor_weight) + (vol/crew × vol_weight). Foundation weeks = max(min_wks, base_wks × load_ratio). Envelope = facade_m² / rate. MEP = max(riser_wks, suites / (suites_per_wk × active_floors)). Interiors = (suites_per_floor / (crews × rate) × storeys) / active_floors.

Schedule savings use site GC% and financing rates from the Estimator tab. All phase durations computed from the Schedule Dynamics inputs above — change any value and both the Gantt and Estimator update immediately.

Core / Lateral Schedule Impact

Table 17MT Core System — Schedule & Cost Parameters

Core schedule impact is modelled as a separate Gantt phase. Core wks/floor and lead floors determine when superstructure can start and whether the core constrains floor erection pace. Parallel cores (CLT, CBF) run alongside gravity framing. Leading cores (CIP, precast) must build ahead before floor erection begins.

Core System	Wks/Floor	Lead (floors)	Parallel?	Cost Premium %	Notes

Schedule savings use site GC% and financing rates from the Estimator tab. Foundations duration driven by structural weight (MT ~500 kg/m³, Steel ~7,850 kg/m³, Concrete ~2,400 kg/m³) + typology live/dead loading. Superstructure = weeks/floor × storeys + volume / crew output (MT 120 m³/wk, Concrete 180 m³/wk, Steel 35,000 kg/wk). Envelope starts N floors behind the active pour/erection: MT 4 fl (prefab panels, direct screw-fix), CIP 5 fl (reshoring + 28-day cure + bracket install), Steel 4 fl (deck pour + cure). MEP starts at 50% of superstructure for all. MT Interiors duration uses the same fit-out rate as CO/ST — driven by suite count, crew size, and active floors per the schedule parameters above.

Mass Timber Crane Analysis ✎ All inputs editable — updates live

Crane Hours

Hours per day 8.0 hr/day Days per week 5 days/wk

CLT Panel Size

Thickness (mm) Width (m) 3.0 m Length (m) 12.0 m

Vol: — m³ · — kg

Glulam Member Size

Width (mm) 175 mm Depth (mm) 456 mm Length (m) 7.0 m

Vol: 0.558 m³ · 279 kg

Pick Cycle Time

Beam / column (min/pick) 12 min Panel (min/pick) 12 min

Hook Speed / Height

Hoist speed full load (m/min) 60 m/min Floor-to-floor height (m) 3.2 m

Tower Crane Reach

Jib reach (m) 50 m Tip capacity at reach (t) 3.0 t

—

Spider Crane & Bundling

Spider crane for column placement Spider reach (m) 8 m

—

Enable for bundling + parallel placement.

Crane Sharing

% time for envelope / facade 15% Rigging / dunnage overhead 15%

Member Count Overrides — leave blank to use calculated values from volume ÷ avg member size

Total glulam beams & columns

Calculated: —

Total CLT floor panels

Calculated: —

Total CLT core wall panels

Calculated: — (panels capped at 12 m length)

Crane analysis loads when Schedule tab is active. Inputs driven from Estimator tab (MT intensity, floor area, storeys, glulam/CLT ratio).

Financial Estimates & NPV Analysis

All values pulled live from the Estimator. Three panels: structure-to-structure comparison, construction-period NPV, and long-term outlook. Inputs for the long-term panel are below.

Class D Estimate ±25% All cost totals are planning-level estimates per CIQS/AACE classification. Not a substitute for a detailed quantity survey.

Report format Hide detailed breakdown Selected format is included in the PDF report

Table 22 Inputs — Full Construction Cost Stack

Structure & Enclosure

Div 07 — Envelope / Facade Rate $/m² facade

$1,250

Intensity from NBCC 2020 seismic/wind analysis — updates with location.

Manual % override — 0 = use intensity data

MT Mech / Plumb Discount (vs CO/ST)

-5%

Applied to MT mechanical & plumbing only (not electrical). Easier fastening to timber, higher prefab precision (fewer RFIs/rework), and easier modification vs CIP anchors.

Div 09 — Interior Partitions (CIQS B11) $/m²

$130

Suite demising, corridor and party walls: studs + board + tape + paint. Applied equally to all three systems — a partition is the same wall whatever the frame behind it, so encapsulation does not reduce it. Ceiling drywall is not here: MT’s and CIP’s sit in their structural rate, steel’s in its own drywall line.

MEP & Conveying

Div 23 — Mechanical (HVAC) $/m²

$440

Div 26 — Electrical $/m²

$200

Div 22 — Plumbing $/m²

$185

Div 14 — Conveying (elevators) $/m²

$110

Finishes & Soft Costs

Interior & Site Finishes master $/m² (Div 09-12, 32)

Lowrental · $310

Midmarket · $442

Highluxury · $656

$442

Pick a grade preset, then fine-tune with the slider. Proportionally scales Div 09 Finishes, Div 10 Specialties, Div 11 Equipment, Div 12 Furnishings, and Div 32 Exterior Improvements. Mid (default) = $442/m² ($350+$12+$25+$30+$25). Interior partitions are not in here — they are the separate Div 09 Partitions line below, so grade does not scale them. Individual divisions adjustable in the cost breakdown below.

Div 05 Misc Metals $/m² GFA — applied equally all systems

$60/m²

Stairs, railings, embeds, lintels, bollards, dunnage, screens — system-independent misc metals. Altus 2026: $40–$80/m². Separate from structural connections (MT/ST sections above).

Site Servicing & Civil $/m² GFA — applied equally all systems

Utility connections, frontage works, civil. Default $0 — input project-specific value. Vancouver infill typically $30–$80/m².

Consultants (% of subtotal)

10%

Contingency (% of subtotal)

15%

Permits & Dev Charges (% of subtotal)

Market Cost Index (loads per city — override for what-if)

Per-market construction cost index (base = 100). Loads automatically from the selected city (Vancouver 121, NYC 135, Houston 71…) and scales all trade costs — MEP, finishes, envelope, conveying, foundation. Structure is priced separately via concrete/steel. Override for sensitivity. See Data Tables → Market Cost Index.

Index (city default, overridable)

121%

Derived hard cost —

Estimator hard cost slider —

Table 21 — Panel A: Structure-to-Structure (construction cost only)

Direct structural cost comparison including encapsulation/fireproofing for each system. No schedule savings applied. Use this panel for pure construction cost benchmarking.

Loading…

Table 22 — Panel B: Construction-Period Net Cost (structural + schedule & financing savings)

Net project cost = structural cost minus GC time costs and construction interest saved from the compressed timeline. GC general conditions and construction loan interest are real costs that stop accruing when the building completes — not opportunity costs. See Schedule & Savings inputs on the Estimator tab for GC% and financing rate assumptions.

Loading…

Table 23 Inputs — Long-Term Outlook Parameters

Adjust to your local knowledge. Every value below is seeded as a best-effort, source-cited guess for the selected city (rent, occupancy, land, cap rate, development charges auto-load on city change). These are Class-D starting points that coordinate with each other — but a local developer, appraiser or QS will know better on any single number. Override freely; the sliders are the model.

Market Type:

Rental (Build-to-Hold) Sales / Condo (Build-to-Sell)

Land & Development Costs

Land cost $/m² buildable GFA

$0 (excluded)

Revenue & Market Assumptions (Rental)

Base Rent 2-bed reference · $/m² NLA/yr

$290

Unit Mix

% of units by type. Smaller units rent higher per m², so the mix grades the 2-bed reference to a blended building rent. (×n = $/m² premium vs 2-bed; sizes 40/58/88/115 m².)

Studio ×1.35 1 Bed ×1.18 2 Bed ×1.00 3 Bed ×0.90

Monthly Unit Rent Proxy

800 ft² (74 m²)— 1,200 ft² (111 m²)— 1,400 ft² (130 m²)—

Vancouver 2025 market: 800ft²~$2,800–3,400/mo · 1,200ft²~$3,400–4,200/mo · 1,400ft²~$4,000–5,000/mo

Base Occupancy (%)

93%

Operating Expense Ratio (% of gross rent)

Converts gross asking rent to NOI before capitalisation. New-build multifamily ~35% (property tax, mgmt, R&M, utilities, insurance, reserves); REIT NOI margins ~60–64%.

35%

Mass-Timber Revenue Premium

MT Rental Premium % above base rent

2.0%

Occupancy Uplift (%)

2.0%

NPV Parameters

Cap Rate % — going-in, stabilised

5.0%

Hold Discount Rate % /yr — rental hold

Required return on the stabilised asset. Auto-set to cap rate + rent growth per city, so the rental NPV reads as a development spread (≈0 when you build at the market cap). Override as needed. (Build-to-sell uses its own discount, below.)

6.00%

Hold Period (years)

10 yrs

NLA / GFA ratio (%)

82%

Annual Rent Growth (%)

2.00%

Going-out Cap Spread (bps above going-in)

+25 bps

Development / Build-to-Sell Discount Rate

Development Discount Rate % / yr

Merchant-developer cost of capital — discounts the build-to-sell condo cashflows (Sales mode). The rental hold uses its own Hold Discount Rate (NPV Parameters card), which auto-tracks the city cap rate.

7.0%

Permanent Financing (Mortgage Takeout)

Mortgage Rate %

4.50%

Amortization yrs

35 yrs

LTV at Takeout %

75%

Min DSCR x

1.10x

CMHC MLI: 3.5-5.5%, 40-50yr, 95% LTV, 1.10x DSCR.
Conventional: 5-7%, 25-30yr, 65-75% LTV, 1.20-1.30x.

Operational Costs & Energy (Annual, $/m² NLA)

Building Insurance

Base rate $/m² NLA/yr

0.15–0.40% of replacement cost. Mid-rise BC: ~$8–14/m²/yr

$10/m²

MT premium % above base

Enclosed MT: 10–25% premium. Lower than CoC — building is protected.

+15%

Operations & Maintenance

Base O&M cost $/m² NLA/yr

Repairs, cleaning, management. Mid-rise BC: ~$30–55/m²/yr

$40/m²

MT O&M discount %

MT buildings: fewer wet trades, less concrete remediation. Estimated 5–15% lower.

-8%

HVAC / Energy

Base HVAC energy $/m² GFA/yr

Mid-rise BC: ~$6–12/m²/yr. Includes heating, cooling, ventilation.

$8/m²

MT HVAC discount %

Better air sealing, less thermal bridging. Peer-reviewed range: 5–20%.

-10%

Development Charges

Municipal DCs / levies / impact fees per unit — a real cash cost on both a rental hold and a condo sale. Loads per city as a best-effort, source-cited estimate; override to your local schedule.

Development charges $/unit

$25,000

Table 23 — Panel C: Long-Term NPV (rental premium + occupancy uplift over hold period)

Models the present value of MT’s rental premium and occupancy advantage over the hold period. Compares that PV benefit against the construction cost delta vs. concrete and steel. Positive = MT wins on total NPV. Set rental premium and/or occupancy uplift to activate.

Enter rental premium and/or occupancy uplift above to calculate long-term NPV.

Table 24 — Developer Cashflow — Weekly Draw Schedule

Payment outflows by scope. MT timber package deposits fire pre-construction (weeks shown as negative). Equity funds first, loan draws after. Loan balance repaid at completion. GB = ground break.

System:

Foundations

Superstructure

Envelope

MEP

Interiors

GC Overhead

Consultants

Permits

Financing (interest)

Loan Balance (right axis)

Equity Spent (right axis)

Total Project Cost

—

hard cost + GC + soft costs − schedule savings

Equity Required

—

—% of total

Peak Loan Balance

—

repaid at completion

Construction Interest

—

accrued on loan

First Cash Out

—

wks before ground break

Project Duration

—

weeks on site

Capital Velocity — equity recycled into back-to-back projects

Horizon yrs Redeployment lag months

	MT	CIP	ST
Cycle time	—	—	—
Project turns / horizon	—	—	—
Equity multiple / cycle	—	—	—
Compounded equity (horizon)	—	—	—

Context: a merchant / build-to-sell lens, not a replacement for IRR. It assumes the developer is equity-constrained (capital, not opportunities, is the binding limit) and can redeploy immediately into the next project after the lag above. The compounded figure assumes every cycle repeats at the same per-cycle return, so treat it as an upper-bound illustration of the velocity effect, not a forecast. For a buy-and-hold owner this doesn’t apply — use NPV/IRR. IRR already rewards speed as a rate; this expresses the same advantage as compounded total wealth.

Structural System Cost Estimator

Table 1Material Intensity by Building Typology (m³/m²)

Table 2Material Intensity by Structural System Type (m³/m²)

Table 3MT Package Pricing Basis ($/m³) — edit frequencies to recalculate weighted average

Table 4Fire Rating Impact on Material Intensity — Glulam vs. CLT Split

Table 5NBC 2020 Encapsulation Requirements by Building Type

Table 5eMass Timber Insurance — Course of Construction & Operational Benchmarks

Table 6Concrete Structural Systems — Intensity, Types & Cost Drivers (m³/m²)

Table 6bLCA Embodied Carbon Benchmarks — Concrete Structure (kg CO&sub2;e/m² GFA)

Table 6c12–18 Storey CIP Concrete — Structural Intensity by Market & System (m³/m²)

ResearchHalifax Project 1 — Developer-Supplied Concrete Data

Table 7Concrete All-In Placed Rate by Market — Master Reference ($/m³)

Table 8Gypsum / Finish Allowance for Like-for-Like Scope ($/m²)

Table 9Foundation Calculation Parameters — DATA.foundationParams

Table 10aPodium Structural Grid — Concrete Intensity & Cost Basis

Table 10bTransfer Slab Types — Cost & Schedule by Configuration

Table 11Steel Intensity by Building Program (kg/m²)

Table 12Steel Installed Cost $/m² by Intensity & Price (at 25% install, +$75 fire/deck)

Table 13Add-ons for Like-for-Like Comparison ($/m²)

Table 13aAll-In Erected Rate by Market — DATA.locationSteel ($/kg)

Table 14Fabricated & Installed Cost ($/m²) by Install Factor at $5/kg

Table 15Oil Price Impact on Structural Cost ($/m² delta from $60/bbl baseline)

Table 16Carbon Price Impact on Structural Cost ($/m² delta from $0/tonne baseline)

Table 20Full Construction Cost Stack Benchmarks — Canadian Mid-Rise Residential ($/m² GFA)

Table 21MT Acoustic Topping Types — Load & Cost Reference

Table 22Market Cost Index — MEP, Finishes & Envelope (absolute multiplier on base; loads the slider per city)

Table 23Parkade, Encapsulation & Conveying Parameters — DATA reference

Table 24Schedule Base Superstructure Weeks by Typology — DATA.scheduleWeeks

Table 26Core / Lateral System Intensity by City & Frame

Table 27MT Core System — Schedule & Cost Impacts ✎ Editable — all calculations update on change

Table 28Seismic Reference Weights — DATA.seismicWeights & Core Scaling

LiveLife Cycle Assessment — Embodied Carbon Comparison

SensitivityTornado Chart — MT Net All-In vs CIP Concrete ($/m²)

Assumptions AuditAdjustments from Default — Conservatism Tracker

LiveCalculations Audit

Table 25Schedule Dynamics — All Variables Exposed

Table 17MT Core System — Schedule & Cost Parameters

⚙ Data Source Check

⚙ Compute Snapshot & Compare

Competitive Matrix: MT vs CIP Concrete