Sustainable Design: New Directions for Affordable Housing

National Building Museum
http://www.nbm.org
May 30
Washington, DC
 
Note: I’ll have a cover story in a leading vertical industry publication coming out later this summer. In the interim, here is a detailed report on a conference that revealed the benefits of integrating green materials and techniques into affordable housing. Green’s not just for the elite.

In America, the demand for affordable housing has grown along with the green wave. So how do you design energy-efficient and sustainably designed residences? Finance them? Convince influencers, community leaders and residents that green can and should be a component of affordable housing? And how to make sure green dreams turn into reality, when too often good intentions unravel with the inevitable pull of mediocrity, competing interests, missteps and plain old time pressures?

This day-long symposium focused on three of the mixed-income projects now popping up coast to coast, from cosmopolitan centers to small markets. Nationally recognized experts and developer-architect teams shared lessons learned in: Facets examined: Design process and technologies; costs and benefits of green design elements; and realistic strategies for financing.

The feature projects:

* Maverick Landing in East Boston: 396 mixed-income rental units replacement an existing housing development

Maverick Landing also offered jobs to local construction workers. This Hope VI project contains 396 mixed-income rental units constructed in four phases, the first completed in late 2004 and the last two years later. Using technology such as photovoltaics, the project has earned architectural awards and was named Best Overall Project in 2006 by readers of Affordable Housing Finance. Budget: $135 million.

* Faison Mews in Camden, NJ, which mixed new construction and rehabilitation of a historic building

This mix of new construction and rehabilitation of a historic building provides 51 rental units for seniors. The project earned the 2006 New Jersey Governor's Excellence in Housing Award for outstanding green/sustainable design. Budget: $8.9 million.

This redevelopment project involved demolition of 413 housing units. The team members transformed a monolithic super-block with hardly any permeable surfaces to a new design with open space, private backyards, 13 extra units – exceeding the Healthy Homes standard. One mid-rise used its Massachusetts Technology collaborative grant to install photovoltaic panels and a cogeneration system to reduce dependence on outside energy sources. Most of the units reserved to local workers with households earning less than 60% of the area median income.

* Prospect Terrace in Asheville, NC: a project first completed under the North Carolina Healthy Built Homes Initiative, with 17 cottage homes and condos sold at affordable and market rates.
Budget: $2.6 million.

Prospect Terrace turned kudzu infill into housing, much of it research for lower income local workers. One goal was to demonstrate that green housing can also be the best affordable housing solution in an age when most workers in many US cities have been priced out of their local housing markets, with housing choices requiring far more than the recommended limit for housing expenses of 30% of household income.

One speaker noted how the future holds very few single-family affordable houses.

Lessons learned included: start with a Dream Green Team: active supportive community members, green-committed architects and developers, people who know where to get funding assistance to offset green premiums, LEED AP designers, government support.

Worth noting: Communities with active housing advocates ten to have more land use regulations. But more land use regulates contribute to higher building costs, thus pushing “affordable” further out of reach.

* Issues:

Why are photovoltaics (PV) affordable in Europe? Because they have been in wide use there. PV is a key to self-sustaining energy production. In the U.S., it’s still considered a bling thing. A consideration: 80% of energy in the U.S. is consumed by buildings.

Another question: should individual consumers’ self-sustaining generation systems be stressed, or the empowerment of utility companies to engineer the PV and wind energy systems, centralizing the advancements, installation, maintenance and savings?

One expert’s first recommendation to clients: Get your HVAC under control. Smaller buildings are shell-dominated, meaning you can make gains with practical changes to the enclosure. With larger buildings, “much of the magic is in the systems,”so focusing on systems yields great gains.

Increasingly, the leading architects and designers are integrating building science approaches as part of their artistic palettes. They turn the advances into buildable details.

How do you get builders to do it right? Home Energy Rating System HERS can do a software analysis on the plans. They overlay the requirements on the contractors’ plans so the homes will meet green specifications.

* The Greening Affordable Housing – Why Do It? Building green affordable housing has many societal, economic, and environmental benefits: financial benefits for residents, owners, developers, and investors. Indirect benefits to the community, region and world. Some positive effects are tangible and measurable, while others – such as improved health, comfort, well-being, and
feelings of pride – can be difficult to measure.

Resident benefits: Lower energy and water bills; healthy environment, reduced transportation costs, more employment opportunities, and a healthier lifestyle (when housing is built in walkable communities that are near mass transit, jobs, and services)

Developer/Owner Benefits: Competitive advantage by receiving low-income housing tax credits; green rebates; community good will; operating cost savings (utilities, maintenance and replacement costs); reduced liability risk from building-related health problems that result from chemical and
biological contaminants

Investor benefits: Recognition for environmental leadership and stewardship; positive public relations; long-term returns; increased building value

Community benefits: Reduced burden on municipal infrastructure, such as landfills, water
supply and treatment, and storm water management systems; reduced air and water pollution; reduced sprawl; healthier citizens; healthier work environments for construction, maintenance and manufacturing workers

Environmental benefits: Water conservation; protection of air and water quality; reduced greenhouse gas emissions, reduced contribution to climate change; habitat protection; natural
resource conservation (e.g., more sustainable forest management); reduced waste.

Strategies:

* All team members work collaboratively instead of in a vacuum, and they share a green commitment.

* Smart land use and site development: Selecting a site that is close to services, public transportation, jobs, schools, and infrastructure (smart growth); redeveloping previously developed land, reusing buildings; designing walkable neighborhoods; minimizing site disturbance; reducing light pollution; reducing storm water runoff from the site.

* Water efficiency: Using high-efficiency fixtures, appliances, and irrigation systems, as well as
climate-appropriate, drought-tolerant plantings.

* Energy efficiency: Light fixtures, appliances, roof; passive design (e.g., leveraging passive solar heating, cooling, and light) through proper orientation; using renewable energy sources.

* Resource-efficient materials: Recycled-content, renewable-resource-based, durable materials; using sustainably harvested wood or engineered wood; recycling construction waste; providing recycling bins (and administering a recycling program) for residents.

* Indoor environmental health: Low-emitting, less-toxic materials and finishes (paint, floor coverings, adhesives and sealants, and composite wood); using design and construction methods to prevent moisture infiltration and mold growth; reducing carbon monoxide risk; providing ample ventilation and exhaust fans; using nontoxic cleaning chemicals; reducing use of toxic pesticides; designing for ample daylight.

Comparing Costs, Justifying Green Investments:

Builder surveys cite green premiums from 6 to 10 %. However, a Habitat for Humanity project in VA built a green house for less money than a comparable size conventional house.

Said one expert: We get a lot of pushback that green is nice but the developer “can’t “ do it without HUD and other government subsidies. Which sounds like excuses, not reasons. these businesspeople are looking for handouts to change their old and outdated standard operating procedures. They want to use their same old supplies, subcontractors, services, systems ... they can practically do that in their sleep.

Energy budgets are 25% of operation budgets and climbing.

Mitigate risks of rising operating costs: energy and water, maintenance, turnover expenses, owner costs. Green choices can save, such as choosing green alternatives over cheaper-upfront carpeting.

Green building makes economic sense. To prove it, work up life cycle costs of green building features vs. comparable features for total development costs. Include OPERATING COSTS such as utilities and maintenance; and REPLACEMENT COSTS (carpet to roofs to wood choices).

Traditionally neglected when costing out projects: Materials, systems and techniques that lower utility bills and maintenance costs!

Collect data from: contractors, estimators, energy model, project experience and vendors.

Energy costs are inflating faster than the consumer price index, so you need to estimate the stream of costs over time.

Increasing market penetration of LEED, Energy Star and other certifications will increase the perceived as well as real value of a home over time, thus accelerating the accumulation of equity. This will affect consumers’ as well as financers’ valuation of homes.

”To make something work, you need more than numbers,” said one speaker. But, he continued, in this society, having the numbers – the performance data – is vital to kickstarting good green projects across the nation. Also realize that many projects are now being dubbed green in order to gain support or even credits, but they don’t meet enough true measures of green building.

Getting a mortgage of $5,000 more to cover the costs of truly greening a new home will pay off in 5 years. Changing out standard and old appliances for Energy Star-rated counterparts will save energy costs month after month.

Granted a tighter home, recycled decking, Hardi siding, Marmoleum (a natural linoleum) and other green upgrades or swaps add to costs. But they also add to a home’s comfort, health, durability, operating efficiency, ease of maintenance and most likely appreciation in value. Also consider that using green techniques won’t in themselves add to the cost of a home.

* Sun-centered:

The Prospect Terrace project was designed to leverage sun exposure. HVAC forms the core of one of its designer’s plans. Examine the position of the sun in each room, she said. Passive solar increases comfort, efficiency and savings; it can even be harnessed for the water heater. Cost benefits are long-term.

Prospect Terrace strategies showed creative thinking and vision. For example, stream restoration, transit oriented, no-VOC paint and building materials for improved indoor air quality, and an energy analysis – done late but that’s better than never. The sooner an analysis is done, the more you can leverage the findings.

* Resources:

healthybuilthomes.org

advancedenergy.org

designadvisor.org (features 30 case studies of green affordable housing from photovoltaics to passive ventilation to cool use of recycled materials to daylighting)