We received comments back from our Design review that seem illogical to us; we're looking for some opinions/clarifications here.
We submitted representative (fabricated) typical, hypothetical office/retail floorplans for the tenant spaces in our CS project. The reviewers accepted EQ Cr 8.2, but had comments on other EQ Credits based on the layouts provided with EQ 8.2.

For example, for EQ Pre 1:
"Provide ventilation rate procedure calculations for the combined multiple ventilation system associated with AHU-1 and ERU-1 and AHU-2 and ERU-2 ensuring that the break out of spaces is consistent with Table IEQ-1 in IEQc8.2: Daylight and Views - Views."
Why would these need to be consistent if the layouts provided are just typical, fabricated possibilities for the purposes of the views credit? Our CS HVAC design is limited to the base building systems only, and does not include any possible tenant fit-out work.

Also, for EQ Cr 1:
"The plans provided in IEQc8.2: Daylight and Views - Views indicate that CO2 sensors have not been installed within each densely occupied space (conference rooms, team rooms, etc.). Provide documentation confirming that all spaces with a design occupant density greater than or equal to 25 people per 1000 square feet are monitored by CO2 sensors, or provide tenant sales and/or lease agreement containing binding language specifying that tenants install CO2 sensors in all densely occupied spaces."
I see on the EQ Cr 1 page that "Installation of CO2 sensors in tenant spaces is not required during core and shell construction, and tenants are not required to install CO2 monitors; however, they should be made aware of the capability of the core and shell system to monitor CO2. The core and shell systems must be designed with the capacity for CO2 monitoring."
Our tenant agreement states (and plans concur) "the installed system in the base building is capable of being expanded to provide CO2 monitoring within the tenant spaces."
Can someone confirm how we should respond to this?

With the EQ 8.2 documentation already submitted, there was a narrative that clearly stated the layouts provided for that credit were purely hypothetical, solely for the purposes of EQ 8.2...
We're just not sure what the reviewers are expecting, or if anything related to EQ Cr 8 needs to change (even though it was accepted) based on the comments on the other credits.