Interesting question. A key principle in sustainability that is often forgotten or undermined is the fact that sustainability is multifaceted and multidimensional. All the 7 items you've mentioned are important and it's necessary to pay attention not to sacrifice one for another. Think of three main pillars of sustainability: environmental, social and economic.

Sustainability is the ability of the people within a community to meet all of their needs using only the resources/ecological services that come from the land/water/air that they are stewards of (or co-managers), and the skills of the population, in less than 24 hours per day per person, in perpetuity (at least past any conventional planning horizon). Note that the ability has to be there, not that all people must have all of their needs met at all times.

So looking at a building in isolation of the community as a whole is like asking if your hand is doing well. Well, yeah, it could be, but that doesn't say anything about the whole.

So lets start at the beginning - what are the needs of your community? What are the symptoms of unmet needs within your community? What activities are expected to be meet needs in the community? How much time to people use at those activities? How is that time use different if they do or do not have symptoms of that need being unmet? What resources and ecological services do they use to meet their needs that they obtain from the land that they are stewards of? How efficiently are the able to use their time to convert resources into the means to meet their needs? How effectively are they able to meet all of their needs using their time and skills? What obstructions are preventing people from being able to meet their needs? Which of these obstructions can be addressed by human development, which by technological development, and which by some combination?

Now, you can move ahead. How does your green building affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the community at meeting their needs? Looking at your 7 points:

How do these things affect how efficiently and effectively any given community is able to meet their needs? The answer is going to be extremely dependant on the setting. #3, for example, is of no importance in Ottawa, where 500m3/s of reasonably clean water flowed past the city during the most severe drought of record, and the reservoirs could have maintained that flow for more than 400 days. In a densely urban area, grey field development is the norm, so #1 would be of no importance at the site (but may be affected by resource extraction). And so on.

I'm not saying your list is trivial - it's not. But it's not where you have to start. You have assumed, before you began, that people need the green building to solve some underlying problem, and that the quality of life of the community will be higher as the result of it's presence. But is that really true? Or is the building treating a symptom without addressing the underlying problem? In which case, quality of life declines due to the costs associated with maintaining the building, because treating the symptom without solving the problem just makes the symptom change from something you understand to something you don't. This is part of why Sustainability is considered a Wicked Problem - if we start in the wrong place, you won't know your symptoms from your problems.

You have to know that the presence of the building increases the quality of life of the community, even when considering those resources and ecological services used in the creation and operation of the building that wont be available at the end of life of the building. Ideally, even after the building site is returned to it's 'cradle', the legacy of the quality of life improvements would linger in the community. If you can't show that, then your 7 points are misplaced - they come after understanding.

The Titanic is sinking from any number of existential threats (climate change, end of age of oil, peak conventional agriculture, collapse of open ocean fisheries, etc). We don't need a green building (or any form of green business, or product, or policy, etc.) to slow the rate of decent. We have to make the ship float, and for that we have to figure out how each community can meet their needs with what they can manage, and then decide how to improve quality of life within the community from there.

effective and efficient use of water resources as water is life