Building a Green Maryland : Maryland Green Building Lawyer & Attorney : Megan Reuwer : O’Malley, Miles, Nylen & Gilmore Law Firm : MD Green Building, Sustainability

I've been busy digging myself out of the record snowfall we got here in Maryland the past few weeks, but I'm back now to let you know that in early February, I took the National Association of Home Builders’ (NAHB) “Green Building for Building Professionals” course; a two-day seminar needed to achieve NAHB’s Certified Green Professional designation. The course covers green building techniques for new residential construction as well as residential remodeling projects and also provides a good background of the various requirements of NAHB’s American National Standards Institute-approved National Green Building Standard.  After completing the course, I realized that I've only briefly touched on the Standard here in my two-part interview with Tom Farasy - so I thought that a more in-depth review was needed.

Background on the National Green Building Standard:

• In 2006, NAHB notified the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) that it intended to develop the National Green Building Standard. NAHB partnered with the International Code Council (ICC) in 2007 to develop the standard, and shortly thereafter, a call for committee members went out. The Consensus Committee on the National Green Building Standard consisted of 42 members that worked to develop a first draft of the Standard. The public had the opportunity to comment on the draft, and then a revised draft was vetted through seven Task Groups, each of which specialized in the different criteria contained in the Standard. The ICC 700-2008 National Green Building Standard was approved by ANSI as an American National Standard on January 29, 2009.

Applicability of the Standard:

• The Standard applies to residential construction including single-family, multi-family, and the lots and sites upon which residential buildings are located, as well as to remodeling and additions to existing residential buildings.

One Major "Plus" Compared to LEED:

• To me, one of the most significant differences in terms of certification types between the Standard and LEED-H is that a developer can attain certification under the Standard for site design and development prior to any construction being built on the site area. Certification levels are denoted by Stars, ranging from One Star (minimum of 79 points) up to Four Stars (minimum of 175 points). I think that certifying green site design and development separate and apart from construction is important for many reasons: (1) it allows developers of residential lots to set themselves apart from competitors by certifying their projects; (2) it recognizes that preparation of residential homes for delivery to the end consumer is a process that usually involves multiple parties (developer plus one or more builders) with distinct responsibilities; and (3) it recognizes that site design and development plays an important role in the overall “greenness” of the project.

One Major "Minus" Compared to LEED:

• There's a very important point to be aware of when assessing your project under the Standard and that is this: the "minimum" performance points needed for each Chapter ARE NOT TRUE MINIMUMS! This means that if you go strictly by the book with the goal of meeting Bronze level and you achieve the 39 points you need for Chapter 5, the 45 points you need for Chapter 6, the 30 points you need for Chapter 7, the 14 points you need for Chapter 8, the 36 points you need for Chapter 9, and the 8 points you need for Chapter 10, you will FALL SHORT and fail to achieve Bronze by 50 POINTS! This is because the Standard has a bonus points category that a project MUST achieve for each certification level (Bronze through Emerald). You gain the needed "Additional Points" by over-achieving in other Chapters.  Therefore, you MUST exceed the stated minimums in order to achieve the needed "Additional Points."

I learned a lot from my builder classmates about cost-effective, green steps a builder can take right now - and I'll be happy to share my "top ten" list with you...next week.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This week's post is Part II of my interview with Thomas M. Farasy, President of the Maryland-National Capital Building Industry Association and President of Terra Verde Communities, LLC, a real estate development, investment, and advisory firm specializing in transit-oriented development, multifamily projects, and green building serving the Washington, D.C. area and the Mid-Atlantic region.

In this portion of the interview, Tom answers some of the tougher questions relating to the cost of green building, market support, and whether green building is good from the industry perspective.

Are you aware of any difficulties or issues that builders and developers are facing as they begin to seek either LEED or NGBS certification?

Regardless of the standard or certification process used, there’s a need for continuing education at the contractor and subcontractor level. It’s not enough just to put in a contract that a building has to be built a certain way to comply with whatever credit requirements the owner is seeking; there has to be ongoing communication with those responsible in the field to make sure that things are actually being done in accordance with the credit requirements. Complying with LEED or NGBS requires a lot of oversight in the field because they’re relatively new and the market is still developing. People are still learning what these things mean and how to implement them effectively.

Is the market ready to support green building costs? Do you find that more consumers are specifically looking for green features when they’re shopping for new homes?

The market, for the most part, hasn't been ready to support the extra cost of building a home to any of the green standards. Maybe some areas are becoming more receptive, but, to date, it's largely been my experience that consumers aren’t willing to pay $10,000 extra dollars for a home just because it has been certified green. On the other hand, people DO expect you to provide Energy Star appliances; people DO expect you to put in measures to reduce their energy costs - and they will pay for this.

Is green building good for the building industry?

Yes, the green building movement is good for the industry and I think it’s going to continue to grow. If we expand what we mean by “building green” into further incorporating measures to save water resources, to reduce our carbon footprint, to further reduce our use and dependence on energy resources and natural resources, then it’s going to grow. There is no doubt in my mind that technologies are rapidly developing that will enable the green building movement to expand, and there is no doubt in my mind that we’re going to continue to see new standards and certification processes developed as well as revisions and enhancements to existing standards and processes. What these are, I couldn’t say, but I bet we’ll see them in the future.

Thanks again to Tom for sharing his knowledge and experience with us. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

This week's post is part one of a two-part interview that I conducted with Thomas M. Farasy, President of the Maryland-National Capital Building Industry Association, and President of Terra Verde Communities, LLC, a real estate development, investment, and advisory firm specializing in transit-oriented development, multifamily projects, and green building serving the Washington, D.C. area and the Mid-Atlantic region.

Tom was nice enough to sit down with me and discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of USGBC's LEED certification program and the National Association of Home Builder's ANSI-approved National Green Building Standard. This was a fun and informative interview, and I hope you enjoy it!

The ANSI approved ICC-700-2008 National Green Building Standard (NGBS) includes single and multifamily homes, residential remodeling projects and site development projects. NAHB has billed the NGBS as being more flexible than USGBC’s LEED in terms of recognizing innovative approaches and techniques. Why do you think NAHB developed its own standard, and do you agree that it is more flexible than LEED?

As a multifamily developer, it’s been my experience that LEED is somewhat rigid and is more commercial building friendly. I think NAHB recognized a need for a standard that encompasses the unique features of residential building. For example, while LEED does offer some site development points, the National Green Building Standard is more comprehensive on site development issues and allows you to capture more points than LEED for that site work. The bottom line is that, as an industry, we want choices. We want flexibility.

In addition to the flexibility factor, there’s the issue of tracking how dollars spent translate into actual green features of the site and the building. For instance, if I spend $100,000 to incorporate green elements into my building, under the National Green Building Standard, 90 cents on the dollar goes into actual hard costs; with LEED, only about 75 cents on the dollar goes into hard costs. The other 25 cents goes into consultants, certification processing fees, and other things that just don’t contribute to the end product of the building featuring green elements.

What are the relative strengths of LEED and the National Green Building Standard?

The USGBC has done a great job of marketing LEED; so that when you ask a consumer “what is green?” they will say “LEED.” On the other hand, the National Green Building Standard has been approved by ANSI (the American National Standards Institute), which implies objectivity and impartiality. An ANSI approved standard means that the standard is the result of a collaborative effort. The development and review process for the National Green Building Standard was inclusive and involved participation from a broad spectrum of people: builders, developers, environmentalists, code enforcement officials, politicians, citizens, and community activists, to name a few. For these reasons, it has much more meaning to me and is representative of a greater stakeholder interest.

Check out next Wednesday's post for more valuable insights from Tom, including his thoughts on the market for green building, emerging issues in the field, and whether green building is good from the building industry's perspective.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks