/Blueprint4Greening

GLOBAL GREEN USA

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing: Developer Guidelines for Resource Efficiency and Sustainable Communities

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing: Developer Guidelines for Resource Efficiency and Sustainable Communities Written by Warren Karlenzig Edited by David Malin Roodman Managing Editor, Lynn N. Simon, AIA

GLOBAL GREEN USA

With the support of United States Department of Energy Printing Assistance from Southern California Edison Pasadena Water and Power Thanks to the following organizations for their support of the Greening Affordable Housing Initiative Bank of America Foundation Home Depot Foundation Turner Foundation

ISBN 0-9668092-0-3.

Designers: Garland Kirkpatrick, Helveticajones.com, Santa Monica, California Greg Lindner Design, MacJocks.com, Glendale, California Cover graphic: Blueprint of CASA VERDE townhouses, Hollywood, California Thanks to Roshen Van Cleve Architects, Los Angeles.

Contents

vii

Foreword

ix

Executive Summary

xii

Case Studies Matrix

15

Chapter 1. From Proposal to Groundbreaking

17

Introduction

18

Managing the Development Project Redesigning the Design Process Making the Case for Green Building Local Developers’ Advantage in Greening Affordable Housing How Governments Are Helping

23

Funding and Financing Opportunities Examples of Funding Sources Case Study: Bethel New Life Financing Energy Efficiency Investments

29

Chapter 2. Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

31

Introduction

32

Building a Design Team

33

Contractors and the Bidding Process Case Study: Resourceful Building Project

38

Involving the Community in Planning

40

Visiting the Site

41

Conducting a Site Inventory Case Study: Battle Road Farm

45

Chapter 3. Site Design

47

Introduction

48

Designing Landscaping

50

Preventing Water Pollution

52

Designing for Security

55

Chapter 4. Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

57

Introduction

59

The Building Envelope

61

Incorporating Renewable Energy Daylighting Passive Solar Heating Case Study: Plaza del Sol Case Study: Esperanza del Sol Passive Cooling

68

Active Solar Energy Use

69

Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems

72

Ensuring Healthy Indoor Air

75

Chapter 5. Using Resources More Efficiently in Design, Building and Operations

77

Introduction

78

Conserving Water Indoors

79

Minimizing Materials Impacts Materials Source Reduction Case Study: Casa Verde Builders Choosing Construction Materials Construction Waste Reduction Case Study: Rural Studio Project Helping Residents Recycle

87

Designing Buildings for Durability and Adaptability Case Study: West HELP Development

91

Chapter 6. Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

93

Introduction

94

Redevelopment Infill Challenges and Strategies Case Study: Chinese Community Housing Corporation Brownfield Redevelopment

98

Rehabilitation General Rehabilitation Considerations Rehabilitation Pre-Design Rehabilitation Design and Construction

101 Retrofitting

Case Study: Illinois Energy Efficient Affordable Housing Program Case Study: Massachusetts Finance Agency

105

Chapter 7. Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

107 Introduction 108 How Green Design Cuts O&M Costs 109 How O&M Makes Green Design Work Better

Educating and Involving Residents Training and Performance Incentives for O&M Staff Case Study: Caritas Management Custodial and Housekeeping Practices Performance Contracting Case Study: Oakland Housing Authority 117 Maintaining Security 118 HVAC Maintenance 119 Landscaping Maintenance

121

Chapter 8. Policy and Partnerships

123 Introduction

Non-Profits or Community Based Organizations Building Industry Associations or Home Builder Associations Local Government or Utility Sustainable Building Program National Organizations

133

Appendix

135 A. Resources 139 B. Acknowledgements 140 C. Global Green USA-History and Mission

Foreword This publication marks a new benchmark in the documentation and advancement of resource-efficient, affordable housing. To date, most efforts in the field of resource-efficient building (i.e. green building, sustainable building) have focused primarily on commercial building.

Until the last two to three years, little effort has been devoted to “greening� traditional affordable housing.

Building green does not always cost more. You can build a better quality home by incorporating resource efficient building practices without increasing first costs yet decreasing life cycle costs for the homeowner, resident, and operator. And in building green, the potential for enhanced marketing, savings, and environmental protection is ultimately increased.

We have, through our own work and that of others, recently witnessed a wide variety of developers realize the advantage of green affordable housing. These developers range from Habitat for Humanity International to many local builders in communities across the country. Residents, developers, operators, and the community enjoy several benefits of green housing, such as green energy advantages and decreased maintainance costs. The Earth and future generations will also benefit as we try to make affordable a new level of quality building that considers the environment globally, locally, and in the home.

This is fundamental in addressing our nation’s dire shortage of affordable housing in communities from coast to coast. We must address long-term affordabilty to increase the scarce stock of lowincome housing. A 1998 report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities cites utility and maintenance costs as the top of three conditions contributing to this shortage. Greening affordable housing can bring both those costs down while improving the lives of those in need and creating more livable communities.

vii

The importance of green affordable housing is evident: by narrowing our focus to the intersection of housing and sustainable communities, we can begin effectively countering poverty, the shortage of affordable housing, and dire threats to the environment.

Remember, resource-efficient building does not mean it’s more expensive. Through design and comparably-priced systems and products, we can create housing that lowers energy bills for residents and creates healthier homes. Further, we can foster broad shifts in environmentally-conscious lifestyle trends by increasing accessibility to green building through affordable and sustainable methods.

We have written this publication for developers who hold the key to changing the way we design, build, and construct our communities. Still we anticipate others will find it useful as well. We welcome your comments and feedback as we update this document in future editions and publications.

Matt Petersen, Executive Director

viii

Executive Summary When developers hear the words “green” and “environment,” they often envision higher costs and delays. This document will demonstrate how to increase the value, durability, and marketability of an affordable housing project, through energy and resource development, that in turn helps create stronger and sustainable communities. Most strategies are no or low-cost. Some even show how to access additional funding or new financing.

How an affordable housing development is designed, constructed, and maintained affects residents, the surrounding neighborhood, the local economy, and the environment. In recognition, many developers have begun incorporating new materials and methods into affordable housing designs that reduce environmental impact, strengthens neighborhoods, creates jobs, and lowers costs for residents.

This manual seeks to help developers and other stakeholders profit from a growing wealth of experience. It is not meant to be exhaustive, but to introduce ideas and possibilities.

Green Building Definitions Green building encompasses design, construction, operations and maintenance. It addresses a broad range of issues that fall under the guise of smart land use, energy-efficiency, resource-efficiency, and healthy buildings. Some of these issues include: • Saving energy • Saving water and reducing water pollution • Reducing materials use and choosing materials that do minimal harm to people and the environment during manufacture, use and disposal • Rescuing centrally located land and old or historic buildings from abandonment through adaptive reuse • Reducing car dependency • Reducing suburban sprawl and the need to build additional roads and other infrastructure

ix

• Improving indoor air quality • Saving money for developers by reducing capital, maintenance and operating costs • Saving money for residents by, for example, cutting utility bills • Strengthening the economic fabric of local communities • Spurring local economic development by creating jobs and fostering new businesses

No development will score a perfect 10 on all these scales.

But over time, building design and management can be continually improved, resulting in developments that are much better for people, communities and the environment.

Some green approaches are already widely used. Construction waste recycling is common, as is the use of engineered wood products, made from recycled fibers or parts of trees that were once unusable. But comprehensive, systematic green building is far rarer.

Nevertheless, the amount of effort taking place nationwide is impressive. New materials are being manufactured (and old ones rediscovered) that reduce harm to the environment and human health. Affordable housing is being designed near transit hubs that reduce the need for driving in order to save residents money and cut pollution. Developments are being built that contain retail space and job-training offices, giving residents ways to build skills and work near home. Abandoned inner-city lands and buildings are being redeveloped into inexpensive places to live, their utility bills cut dramatically through improved insulation and other energy efficiency measures.

These guidelines focuse on green strategies that developers, designers, and managers can take at little or no cost. It also includes case studies that show how these techniques are being put to work today. Some of the measures do increase up-front costs, but these are often offset by lower energy bills and maintenance costs over the long term, or by special government funding or tax breaks.

In some case, green developments may take longer and cost more to plan if designers are still coping with learning curves; here too, though, financial and technical assistance is often available from a variety of federal, state, and local sources.

Chapter Overviews Chapter 1 covers the preliminaries in creating a green affordable housing development. It discusses how to make the case for a proposed affordable housing project to lenders, local governments, and the communities that will be affected. It also lists special

x

sources of funding and financing available to green developers.

Chapters 2–5 cover practical aspects of designing a green development. Chapter 2 discusses how to assemble a design team, how to involve the community in the design process, and how to analyze potential development sites from the perspective of green design.

Chapter 3 focuses on the outdoors. It addresses landscaping issues, paying particular attention to the prevention of water pollution. It also discusses the important issue of security.

Chapter 4 moves indoors, outlining a systematic approach to reducing a building’s energy needs: first, maximize insulation and airtightness; then, work to capture renewable energy, such as sunlight (for heat) and wind (for cooling); and, finally, install efficient climate control equipment. Chapter 4 also considers the important and closely related problem of maintaining healthy indoor air.

Chapter 5 analyzes “resource efficiency” including how to cut water use indoors, as well as how to use and choose building materials that minimize harmful health and environmental impacts. Topics covered here include new ideas in materials efficiency such as “optimum value engineering,” ways to recycle construction waste, and ways to make buildings more durable and adaptable.

Chapters 6 and 7 treat topics often underemphasized in green building discussions. Chapter 6 suggests that one of the best ways to make developments greener is to recycle whole buildings and building sites. Redevelopment, rehabilitation, and retrofitting, however, all have their pitfalls, which the chapter reviews.

Chapter 7, on operations and maintenance (O&M), describes the two-way relationship between green design and O&M. On the one hand, many green design techniques reduce O&M costs.

On the other, good O&M is essential to making buildings operate as efficiently and affordably as intended years after they are built.

Finally, Chapter 8 provides illustrations of successful partnerships as well as suggested steps that developers can take to encourage partnerships through public policy.

These guidelines introduce a new way of thinking about affordable housing development. But it does not provide all the answers.

Developers, design professionals, builders, and policymakers still have much to learn about greening affordable housing. If they take on the challenge, the benefits for the environment and for residents will be great and long lasting.

xi

Case Studies

Themes

Bethel New Life Chicago, IL Chapter 1, page 25

• urban revitalization

• collaborating with respected agencies, such as Argonne National Laboratories, to obtain technical assistance and attract additional funding

• land and building reuse

• decrease in suburban sprawl

• redevelopment, rehabilitation, and retrofitting

• energy conserved

• energy efficiency

• job training

• local economy strengthened

• material and energy efficiency in construction

• providing detailed resource, energy efficiency, and waste reduction plans for contractors as part of the Request For Bid (RFB) package

• reduced contractor education time

• changing contractor behavior, educating contractors

• creating a visitor open house

• better pre-design coordination

Resourceful Building Project, Emeryville, CA Chapter 2, page 34

Techniques

Benefits

• special funding from waste management board

Battle Road Farm Lincoln, MA Chapter 2, page 43

Plaza del Sol San Francisco, CA Chapter 4, page 64

• preservation of natural and historic features

• inventorying natural features in thorough pre-design planning

• reduced sewage infrastructure costs

• avoiding infrastructure construction

• using natural wetlands for tertiary wastewater treatment

• mature trees, trails and meadows preserved

• reducing runoff

• reducing paved area

• state financing

• solar orientation and design

• open courtyards for solar exposure and good cross ventilation

• lower utility bills for residents

• water conservation

• open stairways and light portals for daylighting

• reduction in management’s spending for outdoor lighting and water use

• safety

• clustering of vegetation to reduce irrigation needs

• access to sunny open spaces that are also safe

• infill development and integration into fabric of existing neighborhood

Esperanza del Sol Dallas, TX Chapter 4, page 66

xii

• good fit with local neighborhood

• energy efficiency

• extra insulation

• residents’ utility bills are half the usual amount for the area

• renewable energy

• passive solar heating

• saving money in some areas allowed builders to spend more on insulation and IAQ

Case Studies

Case Verde Builders Austin, TX Chapter 5, page 81

Rural Studio Greensboro, AL Chapter 5, page 84

Themes

Techniques

Benefits

• materials efficiency

• a variety of methods for reducing energy and materials impacts

• lower labor costs for developer

• energy efficiency

• training of disadvantaged youth in such techniques

• natural resource conservation

• partnerships

• job skills for disadvantaged youth

• using locally available materials

• lower design and construction costs

• using architecture students for labor

• natural resource conservation

• materials efficiency

• practical education for architecture students

West Help Development Mount Vernon, NY Chapter 5, page 88

• building adaptability

• designing floor plans that can be adapted to meet resident’s needs

• higher occupancy rate • depending on future needs, the building may gain longer useful life, reducing need for demolition and new construction

• resource conservation

Chinese Community Housing Corporation San Francisco, CA Chapter 6, page 96

• infill development

• leasing air rights

• lower development and construction costs

• solar orientation and design

• daylighting

• additional income for air rights lessors

Illinois Energy Efficient Affordable Housing Program Chapter 6, page 102

• land and building reuse

• funding upgrades for energy and resource efficiency

• security for residents • lower development costs • lower utility bills

• energy and resource efficiency

• natural resource conservation

Massachusetts Finance Agency Boston, MA Chapter 6, page 103

Oakland Housing Authority Oakland, CA Chapter 7, page 116

• innovative financing

• performance contracting

• lower utility bills

• energy efficiency

• government agency provides financing

• natural resource conservation

• energy efficiency in federally assisted housing

• performance contracting

• energy saved-funds investments in other complexes

• addressing individually and master metered residences

• lower utility bills

xiii

Chapter 1

From Proposal to Groundbreaking Introduction Managing the Development Project Redesigning the Design Process Making the Case for Green Building Local Developers’ Advantage in Greening Affordable Housing How Governments Are Helping Funding and Financing Opportunities Examples of Funding Sources Financing Energy Efficiency Investments Energy and Location Efficient Mortgages

The Goal of Sustainable Community Development: To advance the creation of livable and vibrant communities through comprehensive approaches that coordinate economic, physical, environmental, community and human development. — U.S. Department of Agriculture, Overview of Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities.

Introduction Affordable housing is about more than affordability and housing.

Affordable housing shapes the lives of its residents, alters the dynamics of neighborhoods, and affects the environment in many ways.

Increasingly, developers and designers of affordable housing are factoring these effects into the ways they design, build and operate.

These changes make sense in terms of dollars-and-cents.

In many cases, saving energy and other resources, for example, means saving money. Lower operating costs mean apartments can be rented out a lower prices or home sold to lower-income buyers.

Energy and resource-efficient developments also benefit surrounding communities. The more residents save on utility bills for instance, the more they will tend to spend back into the local economy.

This can add to the neighborhood’s job base. On-site daycare centers and retail outlets meet residents’ needs for local childcare and shopping even as they reduce driving and its environmental impacts.

Developments that promise such benefits are more likely to gain acceptance from a community and the politicians that represent it.

The purpose of affordable housing has always been to meet public needs. The greening of affordable housing broadens the understanding of those needs. It makes sense that resource-efficient developments, which do better of meeting public needs, are more likely to gain acceptance from government agencies and community groups.

Resource-efficient developments are thus more likely to get built and to meet the test of time.

From Proposal to Groundbreaking

17

Managing the Development Project Green building issues, such as energy and resource efficiency, need to be built into a project long before ground is broken for construction. Affordable housing providers considering green development approaches for the first time need to consider a range of issues that may be new to them. And even among experienced green developers, there is always more to learn about improving environmental performance and cutting costs.

Redesigning the Design Process Designing an efficient system requires thinking about how all of its components interact with each other and with the world around them. Since housing developments are complicated systems—involving budgets, schedules, landscaping, building structure, climate control equipment, residents, maintenance staff, weather patterns, transportation, and neighborhood security—it is nearly impossible for a designer, or even a group of designers from one profession, to think about all of these factors and their interactions well enough to make optimal design choices.

Rather, the best way to design green developments is to assemble a design team with members representing many different professions and interest groups, ranging from the developers themselves to architects and future residents. Each team member brings to the table certain areas of expertise or concern, and through dialogue, the tradeoffs and synergies between their concerns can be fully explored.

Involving community representatives and potential future residents is also useful, both to help ensure that their needs are addressed and to give them a stake in the project’s success.

18

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

What is “Resource Efficiency”?

The oil shocks of the 1970s dramatized the many benefits of conserving energy, from reducing oil import dependence and protecting the environment to saving money. As a result, starting about 25 years ago, builders became much more interested in energy efficiency measures such as insulation and efficient furnaces. Recently, builders have begun to think more broadly about the effects of their products on residents and on their greater home, the Earth. These new concerns include conservation of wetlands, fresh water supplies, and old-growth forests, and making indoor air healthy. “Resource efficiency” refers to all these concerns, and more.

Building materials can be resource efficient, for example, if they use primary resources such as timber in a more efficient manner, or if they are made from recycled materials, or do not present a waste disposal problem, or do not harm indoor air quality by off-gassing toxic chemicals. Determining whether a development is resource efficient requires looking at all of its effects on natural resources. Thus, to take an example, a suburban housing development that uses the most resource-efficient materials available but is located so that residents must drive everywhere is not as resource-efficient as it may appear. Other examples of actions that can lead to low resource efficiency include construction in ecologically sensitive areas, such as wetlands, and landscaping with vegetation that requires much more watering than the local climate normally provides.

In this guidebook, the term “resource efficiency” refers to reducing all these effects— on materials, water, land, and transportation energy use. “Energy efficiency” refers to improving building energy systems and building envelopes. Although energy is a resource, the two terms have developed distinct meanings in the building industry.

Examples of the discoveries that can be made through a collaborative process: • Measures that reduce the need for driving, such as locating a housing development near bus and train lines and putting stores and daycare on-site, also reduce what the developer or local government will need to spend building parking lots and widening streets. For the developer, less space for parking means more space for playgrounds and gardens, or more space to construct additional housing units.

Increased unit density increases revenues.

• Landscaping measures that reduce stormwater runoff, such as leaving emergency access lanes unpaved also reduce the need for spending on stormwater infrastructure.

• Placing community gardens in common areas increases interaction among neighbors, helping to build a sense of community. It also gives residents a source of inexpensive, healthy food, and teaches children where food comes from. Finally, the more time residents spend in these open spaces, the better watched the spaces will be, deterring crime.

One form the collaborative design process can take is a design charrette—an intensive workshop that involves all team members, lasts a day or more, and aims to develop a consensus vision for a new development. Figure 1 provides a schematic of the charrette process.

Making the Case for Green Building The most important stakeholder in any affordable housing development is the local community. Lenders also wield great influence over what is built. Making green affordable housing a success requires convincing both of these groups that energy and resource efficiency will benefit them. For communities, the benefits of green development for local social and economic development should be at the forefront. Retail and daycare included on-site in a proposed project, for example, will provide jobs and needed services for the local community. In addition, energy efficiency reduces utility bills, leaving more money for residents to make rent or mortgage payments.

From Proposal to Groundbreaking

19

Figure 1 Schematic of the charrette process

20

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Local Developers’ Advantage in Greening Affordable Housing Since one major purpose of greening affordable housing is to do a better job of meeting needs of local communities, developers that already have a long history with a community often have an advantage in creating appropriate project proposals. Locally based community development corporations (non-profits) often have knowledge of local needs, material resources, politics, building codes, educational and professional resources, social and health services, and even weather and climate patterns, all of which relate to the development of green affordable housing. They may also have forged relationships with local contractors and unions. Local developers are more likely to hire local workers and buy locally made products, which may increase the economic benefit of the development for the local community, and, reciprocally, increase community support for local developers. Specifying local products and materials can also help the environment by reducing the need for long-distance transportation of goods.

How Governments Are Helping Governments control building codes, development standards, and many financing sources that can either help or hinder energy and resource-efficient practices; their sway is especially strong in government-owned or -funded affordable housing projects.

Many local governments are developing ways to assist developers of green affordable housing.

Following are examples of innovative government support programs for green developers: • Santa Barbara, California, has a builder preference program that expedites permit approvals for recognized green builders by up to six weeks.

• In Austin, Texas, the city’s Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Department, its Planning, Environmental and Conservation Services Department and its Green Building Program have teamed up with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s YouthBuild and the federal AmeriCorps program to train disadvantaged youth in building trades while constructing energy- and resource-efficient homes for low-income families. (See Casa Verde Builders Case Example in Chapter 5.)

• In Seattle, the municipal water and power utilities and the solid waste, planning, building, and housing departments are holding preliminary discussions on how to support the greening of afforable housing development. This interagency communication is an important first step that could eventually lead to innovative programs like those in Austin.

From Proposal to Groundbreaking

21

• Illinois has funded non-profit community groups that retrofit housing once abandoned as too expensive to heat, making it much more energy-efficient and affordable. The program has been successful enough that funding has been extended to support similar measures in new affordable housing as well. (See Illinois EnergyEfficient Affordable Housing Program Case Example in Chapter 6.)

• In Los Angeles, in 1997, the Mayor’s office, the Los Angeles Environmental Affairs Department, the city council, the city architect, the chief city planner, and the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles all participated in a charrette that examined four local affordable housing projects currently under development. The charrette produced a series of policy recommendations for governments wanting to support the greening of affordable housing. (For more information, refer to “Los Angeles Greening Affordable Housing Charrette Summary Report: Recommendations and Strategies for Resource-Efficient Design, Construction, and Maintenance”, published

by Global Green USA.)

22

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Funding and Financing Opportunities One major advantage of broadening the concerns addressed in an affordable housing project to encompass energy and resource efficiency is that it can open new sources of funding and financing.

These include foundations, corporations, and governments at all levels, as well as the various non-profits and authorities that they support, from community groups to regional development authorities.

Many of these organizations may not think of themselves as housing groups, but they are interested in revitalizing inner cities, protecting the environment, slowing the growth of automobile traffic, and/or preserving historic buildings. Thus, they have common interests with green affordable housing developers.

In approaching such funding and financing sources, third-party groups can often serve as valuable intermediaries for developers.

Endorsement from a community group, for example, can go a long way toward satisfying local residents that a new project is in their interest—these new alliances can also include foundations and government funders. Many citywide or regional nonprofits, some of them public-private partnerships, have provided funding and technical support for local housing agencies and nonprofits wanting to develop new housing. Examples include the Chicago Rehab Network, the Los Angeles Coalition of Neighborhood Developers, the New York Community Preservation Corporation, Atlanta’s Turner Foundation, the Cleveland Housing Network, and the Northern California NonProfit Housing Development. Some of these independent organizations have also worked to educate residents and community groups about the benefits of proposed affordable housing projects.1

From Proposal to Groundbreaking

23

Examples of Funding Sources There are many potential funding sources for developers wanting to build affordable housing that responds to environmental and community development concerns. Here is what some developers are doing to make the most of these sources: • Obtaining foundation support based on the environmental or community development benefits of a project. (See Lexington Terrace Case Example in Chapter 4.)

• Gaining sponsorship from corporations outside the housing industry. (See Casa Verde Builders Case Example in Chapter 5.)

• Participating in “demand-side management” programs. Under these programs, utility companies pay customers to invest in energy efficiency measures in their buildings because, from other customers’ points of view, these expenditures are equivalent to investments in new power plants: they free up energy supply for other users. (See Lexington Terrace Case Example in Chapter 4. The future of such programs is uncertain, as Chapter 8 discusses.)

• Using funding or assistance from agencies such as the U.S. Department of Energy (Rebuild America program), Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Commerce (job creation and training programs), Environmental Protection Agency (brownfield redevelopment program), and Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hope VI redevelopment program). (See Bethel New Life Case Example in this chapter and Chinese Community Housing Corporation Case Example in Chater 6.)

• Working in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy research laboratories. These laboratories cannot provide construction funding, but they can collaborate with builders experimenting with new techniques. And non-profit and for-profit housing providers have used partnerships with federal research laboratories to attract funding from other federal sources. (See Bethel New Life Case Example in this Chapter.)

• Incorporating a job training component into the construction or operation of a development, and seeking special funding for it.

(See Bethel New Life Case Example in this chapter and Casa Verde, case example in chapter 5.)

• Leasing municipal property for infill redevelopment. Some cities provide financing for projects on land they own.

24

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

• Creating partnerships between non-profit developers with strong connections to a given community and for-profit developers with useful experience or technical expertise. (See Bethel New Life/Bigelow case example in this chapter. Homes example in Chapter 5.)

• Using funding from local waste management authorities for demonstrations of ways to reduce construction waste. (See Resourceful Building Project Case Example in Chapter 2.)

• Using funding from government programs meant to encourage energy and resource efficiency in affordable housing. (See Illinois Energy Efficiency Affordable Housing Program Case Example in Chapter 6.)

Case Study: Bethel New Life, Chicago, Illinois.

Themes:

Urban revitalization; decrease in suburban sprawl;

energy efficiency.

Techniques:

Collaborating with respected research agencies to obtain

technical assistance and attract additional funding; redevelopment, rehabilitation, and retrofitting; job training.

Benefits:

Land and buildings reused; energy conserved; local economy

strengthened.

Completed Bethel New Life Building Courtesy of Bethel New Life, Chicago, Illinois

Bethel New Life is a faith-based, community development corporation that has developed over 1,200 units of affordable housing in Chicago’s West Garfield Park neighborhood. Over the last thirty years, this inner-city neighborhood has been challenged by a 40 percent unemployment rate, deteriorating infrastructure, a high dropout rate, and residential and business flight. Bethel views these challenges as opportunities for economic revitalization for the community as well as opportunities for individual renewal and growth of local residents.

In 1992, Bethel teamed up with the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory, a research laboratory located between Chicago and Joliet, Illinois. Argonne’s basic mission is to develop new technologies. By collaborating with Bethel, Argonne has been able to explore how new technologies can meet urban needs and challenges. Applications have included energy-efficient affordable housing, environmental restoration of former industrial sites, and recycling of waste streams. Although Argonne cannot directly fund Bethel’s work, it has provided valuable technical expertise. The part-

From Proposal to Groundbreaking

25

nership has also helped Bethel attract funding from other federal sources, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Commerce.

Argonne scientists have given Bethel access to their knowledge of recycled, non-toxic, mass-produced materials for use in construction or building rehabilitation. These materials include cellulose wall insulation, particle board, sealants, and fibers. As part of this partnership, Bethel has instituted a job-training program for neighborhood residents, generating 60 apprenticeship jobs in lead abatement.

For Bethel, the job-training program expresses its philosophy that the best way to provide people with housing is to provide them with jobs; then they can pay for their own housing.

In addition, Bethel and Argonne have cooperated on the redevelopment of 30 brownfield sites, abandoned properties that are at least potentially contaminated with hazardous chemicals. (See Chapter 6.)

Bethel, Argonne, DOE and the local power company (Commonwealth Edison) have also sponsored creation of an affordable energy home center which hosts workshops on construction and financing methods for energy-efficient affordable housing.

Sources: Argonne National Laboratory, Restoring Our Urban Communities: A Model for an Empowered America (Argonne, IL: undated); Mary Nelson, Bethel New Life, Chicago, IL, discussion with author, June 4, 1997.

Financing Energy Efficiency Investments One reason to save energy, of course, is to save money. It stands to reason then that owners and tenants of energy-efficient housing should be better able to make their mortgage or rent payments.

Loans for the construction and purchase of energy-efficient buildings and for efficiency upgrades to existing buildings are less risky than they appear to bankers unaccustomed to thinking about energy efficiency. But if lenders recognize this lower risk, some low-income buyers of energy-efficient homes should qualify for loans they might not otherwise be able to obtain. One innovative type of financing is the “energy-efficient mortgage�(or EEM).

A growing number of public and private initiatives are putting this idea into practice. Because the financing arrangements for single-unit, owner-occupied homes are simplest, this is where the mortgages are being applied. One idea lenders are increasingly using is to allow appraisers to increase the estimated value of homes by an amount equal to the value of any energy-efficiency investments (such as in insulation) or by the present value of future utility bill

26

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

savings—whichever is less. If banks know that an energy efficiency investment will increase the homeowner’s worth (“credit for debt”), they will be more willing to finance such investments through an additional loan.

The most widely known approach to factoring energy savings into mortgage lending is the energy-efficient mortgage or EEM. EEMs have lower income requirements for mortgage borrowers buying energy-efficient homes. Where EEMs are commonly available (in states with official Energy Rating programs, which includes about half of the states in the country), developers who build energy-efficient affordable housing can reach customers who would otherwise be unable to afford homes.

Currently, Federal National Mortgage Association(“Fannie Mae”), the Federal Housing Administration, the Veterans Administration, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) and Country Wide Home Loan offer EEMs. One- and two-unit properties, new or retrofitted, are eligible. The cost of energy efficiency improvements that may be eligible for financing into the mortgage is the greater of five percent of the property value (up to $8,000) or $4,000.

For both developers and homebuyers, the EEM application process can be complicated and intimidating. One solution is to hire an EEM facilitator. As needed, EEM facilitators can order an energy rating done on a unit, choose what efficiency investment to make, schedule the work, ensure that it is done correctly, arrange for final inspection, and pay subcontractors when the escrow is released.

Realtors and lenders do not yet offer EEMs for multifamily buildings. Quality and performance verification is much more difficult for multifamily units than it is for single-family homes because the amount of energy a unit uses depends on the behavior of occupants of adjacent units. If the downstairs neighbors turn down the heat, then the upstairs neighbors will use more, regardless of how well their new windows insulate. Master metering of buildings creates another obstacle, because it deprives tenants of control over their energy bills. Moreover, in recent years, low energy prices have made energy conservation a lower priority for all parties involved.

Energy-efficient mortgages will, however, continue to become easier to secure and process. Current EEM lenders are reporting that customer interest is much higher than expected. An industry comprised of energy contractors, facilitators, and lending specialists is developing in support of EEMs. The combination of higher demand and industry support should make energy-efficient mortgages standard throughout the United States within five years.

From Proposal to Groundbreaking

27

One example of an affordable housing project where EEMs will be actively marketed to buyers is Village Green. Once completed, this 186 unit, single family project in the San Fernando Valley, will be the largest transit-based development in Los Angeles County.

Energy- and Location-Efficient Mortgages As described in the “Funding and Financing Opportunities” section in Chapter 1, one promising policy approach for supporting green affordable housing is to reduce income requirements on loans to families buying energy-efficient homes—on the idea that lower utility bills will make the families a better risk. “Energy-efficient mortgages” (EEMs) are now regularly used in about half of the states in the country.2 Federal agencies such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) have been the lenders in almost all cases. The main reason EEMs are not more universally available is that many states lack a standardized Energy Rating System, which mortgage appraisers need to estimate the utility bill savings from efficiency investments in new and rehabilitated units. A lack of awareness and understanding of EEMs also continues to impede their use.

Fannie Mae is now experimenting with an innovative extension of the EEM idea known as the “location-efficient mortgage.” This type of mortgage recognizes that owners of homes in high-density areas, where driving is less necessary, will have lower transportation expenses, and thus can carry the same mortgage on a lower income.

A 1994 National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) study found that automobile-related costs in dense northeastern San Francisco averaged $4,200 a year per household compared to $17,800 in the nearby suburban area of Danville-San Ramon. Thus, the inner-city households spent an average of $1,130 less each month on car-related costs. Assuming conservatively that a family in the high-density area could apply $500 more to mortgage payments, that family should be able to qualify for a mortgage on a house costing an impressive $50,000 more.7 Partly in response to this study, NRDC, the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, in Chicago, and the Surface Transportation Policy Project, in Washington, D.C., have joined with Fannie Mae to develop a location-efficient mortgage pilot program. (The U.S. Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency have provided support.) Fannie Mae’s Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Chicago branches are all taking part in the experiment.

Endnotes 1. Peter Dreier, “The New Politics of Housing,” Journal of American Planning Association, Winter 1997, p. 7.

2. John Aguire, Vice-President, Countrywide Home Loans, Pasadena, CA, Discussion with author, July 1997.

3. John Holtzclaw, “Using Residential Patterns and Transit to Decrease Dependence and Costs” (San Francisco: National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), 1994); Donna Liu, NRDC, San Francisco, discussion with author, March 26, 1997.

28

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Chapter 2

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process Introduction Building a Design Team Contractors and the Bidding Process Involving the Community in Planning Visiting the Site Conducting a Site Inventory

Introduction The planning and pre-design stages are the most crucial in creating green affordable housing. An integrated approach is crucial for a project’s success. The comprehensive green design approach requires that developers and designers invest extra time at the beginning of a project in thinking about the interactions among all project participants, including: the developer, the design and construction teams, and residents. In the long run, this will help ensure that interrelated design components work together effectively and efficiently while satisfying goals ranging from energy efficiency to healthy indoor air.

Since it is so important, the planning and design process itself needs planning. This chapter offers a framework and strategy to maximize the planning process in supprt of green building.

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

31

Building a Design Team Assembling the design team early on is crucial to the success of green design. The first meeting should include not only the developer and architect, but also the landscape designer, building manager, prime contractor, construction manager, a mechanical systems expert, and a resident advocate (perhaps a future resident). All parties should commit to the project’s green goals as expressed in a project vision statement. The statement needs to provide a starting point, and a philosophy to guide subsequent project decisions.

An example: This development will attempt to provide homes that are healthy, comfortable, and affordable for residents while doing minimal harm to the local community and the local and global environment. We will strive to work towards this goal through coordinated planning and design approaches that take into account the many interactions between site, building components, managers, and residents.

This project vision statement can then be used as the basis for developing Green Guidelines. Green Guidelines articulate goals in greater detail, for example by calling for as much renewable energy use or construction waste recycling as possible. Still greater specificity will come at the building design phase, once parameters such as budgets, material sourcing, and energy-using system requirements become known. The Guidelines should cover the following categories: • Energy efficiency and renewable energy use • On- and off-site environmental impacts • Resource efficiency in design, construction, and operations • Effects on indoor air quality • Effects on the immediate neighborhood

32

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Contractors and the Bidding Process The green approach to affordable housing requires that developers think carefully about how they select contractors. Negotiated contracts may work better than a public bidding process, since the contractor can be carefully selected and hired at an early stage.

Developers should consider pre-qualifying contractors and design team members, pre-selecting them, or inviting bids. These steps will help ensure that the chosen contractors have experience and interest in green building practices. It can also help ensure that the contractors are willing to participate in the give and take of the design process from the beginning, providing feedback on the costs and practicality of various options and listening to new ideas.

A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) can be developed in preparation for hiring appropriate design and engineering professionals.

The RFQ should identify the skills required for participation in the project, including green building and development expertise.

The Request for Proposals (RFP), which can include a project vision statement and Green Guidelines, should be developed in conjunction with the RFQ. The RFP gives potential designers and engineers background information they need to develop a proposal. Schedules, funding sources, partnerships, and case examples can all be useful in an RFP. Finally, further into the project, the Request for Bids (RFB) can specify environmental goals and requirements precisely.

(See Resourceful Building Project Case Example in this chapter.)

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

33

Case Study: Resourceful Building Project, Emeryville, California.

Themes:

Material and energy efficiency in construction; changing

contractors behavior; educating contractors .

Techniques:

Providing detailed resource and energy efficiency

and waste reduction plans for contractors as part of Request for Bid (RFB) package; creating a visitor open house Benefits:

Reduced contractor education time; better pre-design

coordination; special funding from waste management board.

Resourceful Building Project,

The Resourceful Building Project, a pilot low- to moderate-income affordable housing project in Emeryville, California, is ensuring resource and energy efficiency in the pre-design and construction planning process through careful drafting of its Request for Bids (RFB). The developer, the City of Emeryville Redevelopment Agency, issued the RFB in conjunction with the architect, Siegel & Strain.

The RFB organizes resource and energy efficiency specifications according to the Construction Specifications Institute’s standard Divisions 1-16. It covers job site waste reduction plans, for instance, in Division One. Division Six has ten separate stipulations, such as framing with 24” spacing, using wood certified as sustainably harvested for framing and exterior finish, and employing foundation sill sealer. Siegel & Strain Architects also prepared a Construction Waste Management Plan along with the RFB, including contact information for companies willing to take or buy leftover materials.

The contractor had no green building experience. The RFB, however, provided the contractor with a valuable guide for the work to come and the early notice gave the company the information and time it needed to work toward the project’s environmental goals.

The Resourceful Building Project was funded in part by $80,000 from the regional waste control authority, the Alameda County Waste Management Authority and Recycling Board. It earmarked this funding for several purposes, including extra research on resourceefficient materials and the creation of an open house to demonstrate for visitors the innovative techniques used in the project.

34

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Emeryville, California Design by Siegel & Strain Architects

Following is an excerpt from the RFB: EMERYVILLE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REQUEST FOR BIDS

For the Construction of 1258–64th Street Condominiums Emeryville, California

I. Background

The Project involves the construction of three (3) ownership housing units for low to moderate income households. The unit mix is as follows: Two 3-bedroom units with 2-1/2 baths, and One 2- bedroom unit with 1-1/2 baths. All three units have enclosed garages and private back yards. There is an automatic irrigation system for the common landscaped areas.

In addition, this development is also a "pilot green project" for the Alameda County Waste Management Authority and Recycling Board (ACWMA/RB). The intent of the "green project" is to provide energy efficient housing which is easy and inexpensive to maintain, use construction materials which reduce environmental impacts, and exercise waste reduction and recycling of materials during construction.

The following materials, methods and equipment have been specified to help meet the Environmental Goals of this project: Division 1 Job site waste reduction, including waste separation and recycling

Division 2 Recycled aggregate base Drip irrigation Drought tolerant plantings

Division 3 Fly Ash concrete Certified Sustainably Harvested wood formwork Re-used formwork Vegetable-based form release

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

35

Division 6 Framing at 24" O.C. Certified Sustainably Harvested wood framing and exterior finish lumber Pressure treated lumber treated with ACQ Engineered wood Pre-fabricated trusses Oriented Strand Board Foam sill sealer Recycled content sill sealer Air barrier underlayment Formaldehyde-free MDF

Division 7 Sprayed cellulose insulation Double glazed skylights Water based sealants Fiber cement siding Fiber cement roofing

Division 8 Steel insulated doors Low-E glazing Horizontal sun shades Solar insect screens

Division 9 Low VOC paint Linoleum sheet material Carpet - recycled content, Low VOC, Dry adhesive Recycled glass tile

Division 11 Energy- and water-efficient appliances

Division 15 Low-flow plumbing fixtures Insulated water heater High efficiency furnace Whole house fans

Division 16 Sealed electrical boxes Fluorescent light fixtures

36

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

PLEASE REVIEW PLANS AND SPEC IFI CATIONS, AND ALL OTHER INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY. I I. Selection Criteria 1. Extensive experience in construction similar to work described in paragraph I. 2. Bidder must be bondable in an amount of 100 percent (100%) of the contract amount.

3. Bidder must be able to mobilize and maintain qualified personnel on the project from preconstruction through completion.

4. Bidder must be able to attend regularly scheduled construction meetings, prepare construction schedules and adhere to them.

5. Bidder must be able to maintain good labor relations from inception to completion of the project.

6. Bidder must be able to carry out specific energy- and resourceefficiency measures.

7. Bidder must be willing to reduce job site waste through the design and implementation of a Waste Management Plan.

Source: Larry Strain, Partner, Siegel & Strain Architects, discussion with author, June 1997; Nancy Malone, Siegel & Strain, Architects, Emeryville, CA, discussion with author, October 1997; Emeryville Redevelopment Agency, “Request For Bids,� Resourceful Building Project (Emeryville, CA: 1997).

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

37

Involving the Community in Planning Developers may find it very helpful to involve future residents and neighbors in the process of planning affordable housing. Involving them allows developers to learn about community needs and preferences in a venue that is far less likely to become confrontational than zoning board or city council meetings. One challenge of involving the community, though, is that building consensus can take a significant amount of time.

A collaborative, interactive community planning process can involve architects, landscape designers, building mangers, developers, and other professionals. It can also involve resident advocates or potential residents, community members, political or neighborhood group representatives, and other stakeholders.

The process can consist of a sequence of meetings over several months or a short, intense charrette, lasting one or two days. Either way, participants should be encouraged to voice their opinions on how current residential and retail buildings, natural amenities, traffic, mass transit, pedestrian features, and other neighborhood characteristics shape their lives—and how the proposed development could improve or worsen them. Often, several competing visions for the proposed housing development will emerge, and will then need to be narrowed down or merged into a single vision.

38

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Descriptions of the site and the proposed development, in the form of models, maps, and inventories, are often valuable aids into discussions with community members, because it is difficult for a large group of people to discuss something constructively unless they first agree on what they are talking about.

A charrette on greening affordable housing in Los Angeles in 1997, facilitated by Global Green USA, provided a model for such collaborations. The Los Angeles Greening Affordable Housing Charrette brought together over 150 people, ranging from nationally known building and landscape designers and energy efficiency experts to future residents and community leaders. They collaborated to produce detailed alternative visions for four projects under development at the time of the charrette. Collaborators strove to reconcile various concerns and interests, whenever they appeared to conflict.

(For more information, refer to “Los Angeles Greening Affordable Housing Charrette Summary Report: Recommendations and Strategies for Resource-Efficient Design, Construction, and Maintenance,� published by Global Green USA.)

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

39

Visiting the Site The development team should visit any site under serious consideration and explore it on foot, in order to analyze characteristics relevant to making the development as environmentally sound, community-appropriate, and affordable as possible. Smells, sights, sounds, and weather provide a sense of place and are all potentially useful sources of information. It is even more useful to visit a potential site during different times of the day and different seasons. After several visits, the team should develop a better understanding of the patterns of local winds, sun reflection off nearby buildings, and emissions from local factories and traffic. For example, street traffic might turn out to be quite different during morning rush hour than during evening rush hour.

Walking around adjacent areas in the neighborhood can reveal off-site factors that might affect the development, such as traffic and pedestrian circulation patterns, neighborhood features, factories and retail outlets, and crime rates (perhaps evidenced by vandalism). Site visits also allow team members to imagine how the development would affect the appearance of the neighborhood, and, conversely, to consider how to place the buildings in order to take advantage of desirable views from the site itself.

Though some factors such as crime cannot be easily changed, many can be mitigated through careful design (discussed in Chapter 3).

40

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Conducting a Site Inventory To maximize the benefits of a development, green design needs to use the local landscape, climate, ecosystem, and existing built environment as design components. Designers need to gather as much information as possible about these factors before planning, by conducting a “site inventory.” Site inventories are most useful at undeveloped sites with more natural resources, but can be helpful even for infill or redevelopment projects.

Factors to inventory include: No-Cost/Low-Cost Site Inventory Measures

• Regional climate. Site assessment should begin with a determination of which way is south. In the Northern Hemisphere, this side of a building receives the most sun—that is, free heat and light—in winter.

Similarly, seasonal wind patterns should be noted since they can be exploited to provide cooling cross-ventilation in summer. Other climate data should be collected, including ranges and averages for temperature, humidity, and precipitation, and average annual heating degree-days and cooling degree-days.

• Microclimate. Two sites within the same city or region can differ in prevailing wind patterns, temperature, and precipitation. Urban structures such as parking lots and skyscrapers can create local heat sinks and wind tunnels, for example. Knowledge of microclimate peculiarities can influence building form and orientation within the site, choices of materials and energy-using systems, and locations of entrances, courtyards, windows, and parking lots.

• Vegetation. Use existing, native trees, shrubbery, and grasses to gather clues about regional climate, microclimate, hydrology, geology, topography, and ecology. Landscaping experts can use these indicators to pinpoint hot and sunny or cool and shady zones, as well as the locations of seasonal springs.

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

41

• Topography. Topography can be turned to advantage in green design. Planners need to identify general features such as slopes and patterns of landforms, in addition to specific features such as ridges, swales, lowlands, and hilltops. Site designers, for example, can use topographic information to minimize cut and fill. They can also take advantage of a hill or valley to reduce the intensity of storms, winter winds, or summer sun reaching a building.

Land features can also provide information on geology (rock formations, such as shelves, may require blasting during excavation), land stability (through fault lines), and patterns of human circulation, evidenced by roads and paths.

• Hydrology. Planners and developers should characterize the hydrological features of the site and determine how they relate to the hydrology of the larger area. Development generally increases the amount of impervious surface over an area. As a result, more water gets channeled into the storm sewer system and less penetrates below the site’s surface to replenish the water table and surface streams. The loss of water moving through natural channels lowers the regional water table and starves streams, rivers, and other bodies of water during drought. Information on local hydrology can help designers plan rainwater supply systems, stormwater management, and environmentally friendly wastewater treatment in order to channel water back to its natural course. (See Chapter 3.)1 Hydrological studies also help the landscape designer determine what types of vegetation will thrive at various locations across the site.

In addition, wetlands (including seasonal wetlands) can be identified for preservation in order to provide valuable natural habitat, filter surface runoff, and, where feasible, treat wastewater.

(See Battle Road Farm Case Example in this chapter.)

• Traffic patterns. Current patterns of circulation by pedestrians, animals, bicycles, and other vehicles should be charted so that developers can decide which to preserve and which to impede.

• Potential hazards. Early on, developers should identify any potential on-site hazards, whether natural or human-made. Developers who anticipate hazards such as floods, fires, earthquakes, and hurricanes, will avoid the risk of costly safety revisions during construction. At brownfield sites, there may also be pollutants in the soil

42

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

or water table from previous or neighboring industrial activity.

Urban soil may be contaminated with lead, for example. Some sites also contain large amounts of naturally occurring radon in the geologic layer. • Existing built environment. New developments can harm a community if they ignore the aesthetic and cultural significance of the existing built environment. Concrete high-rises, for example, may damage an old row house neighborhood’s sense of identity, lowering property values. Homes without front porches in an area where porches are a center of social life can also fray the community fabric and make streets less safe by reducing the number of people outside watching.2

Case Study: Battle Road Farm, Lincoln,Massachusetts Themes:

Preservation of natural and historic features; avoiding new

infrastructure construction; reducing runoff.

Techniques:

Inventorying natural features; using natural wetlands

for tertiary wastewater treatment; reducing paved area.

Benefits:

Reduced sewage infrastructure costs; state financing;

mature trees, trails, and meadow preserved.

Battle Road Farm Lincoln, Massachusetts Photo by Lucy Chen

Battle Road Farm, in Lincoln, Massachusetts, has 120 residential units, of which 40–50 percent are designated as affordable. It looks like a traditional New England town. Yet its practical and aesthetically pleasing design resulted from thorough pre-design planning. In order to preserve as much of the heavily wooded, rolling terrain as possible, the developers conducted a site inventory. Pines, oaks, red maples, birches, and other trees were marked and mapped, as was a Native American burial ground. The developer configured buildings to avoid the burial ground and as many trees as possible. Existing trails and stone walls were also preserved, helping to functionally integrate the development with the immediate area. Clusters of attached units were arranged around a meadow that serves as the town green.

Throughout the site, footpaths are used instead of sidewalks because they facilitate more rain drainage and make for less-polluted runoff than would sidewalks.3 One innovative aspect of the development is its use of an existing wetland for tertiary wastewater treatment. Surface discharges from an on-site wastewater treatment system are channeled into the wetlands, an arrangement that nurtures the wetlands and obviates the need to invest in conventional tertiary treatment systems.

Managing the Planning and Pre-Design Process

43

Because of the lack of pre-existing municipal sewer services to the site, the developer was able to purchase it cheaply enough to offset the cost of installing the private sewer system. Specifically, waste treatment costs of $750,000 and land costs of $1.4 million (for 12 acres) led to a total site cost of about $18,000 per unit, on par with the regional average for land with sewer service. The novel, private sewage system, however, did raise concern in the state, resulting in delays. Some citizen groups worried that such a precedent might lead to development of land throughout the state previously considered undevelopable for lack of sewer service.

The State Executive Office of Communities and Development’s Massachusetts Housing Partnership awarded the Battle Road Farms developer an $825,000 Community Development Grant to help cover infrastructure costs. The town of Lincoln also helped make Battle Road Farms a success. It initiated the project and carried the financing of the land during the planning phase. In exchange for its assistance, the town reserved the right to oversee the project’s design in detail, particularly its use of land.

Sources: Bob Keuhn, President, Keen Development Corporation, Cambridge, MA, discussion with author, March 20, 1997; Michael Pyatok, Good Neighbors: Affordable Family Housing (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), p. 166; Urban Land Institute, “General Decscription: Battle Road Farm,” Project Reference Files, Volume 21, No. 2, January-March 1991.

Endnotes 1. James M. Patchett and Gerould Wilhelm, “The Ecology and Culture of Water, Naperville, Illinois Conservation Design Forum, October 1996, pp 3–4.

2. John Knott, Chief Executive Officer, Island Preservation Partnership, Isle of Palms, SC, Letter to Author, August 14, 1997.

3. Urban Land Institute, “General Description: Battle Road Farm,” Project reference files, volume 21, No. 2, January–March 1991.

44

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Chapter 3

Site Design Introduction Designing Landscaping Preventing Water Pollution Designing for Security Designing the Exterior for Security Designing the Interior for Security

Introduction Developers who want to build housing developments need to think of the issues as sets of overlapping systems. During the planning process, they analyze a site’s natural features, climate, and existing structures. In the next stage, they need to overlay information about what they want from the development and techniques for achieving green building. These goals can include energy efficiency, cost, comfort, healthfulness, and security. As designers begin to analyze all this information, formerly separate goals such as energy efficiency and water management will become interrelated. Trees, for example, can both save energy by shading buildings in summer and filter stormwater runoff. The next three chapters, on site design, energy efficiency, and resource efficiency, are meant to help design teams incorporate all of these factors.

Naturally, the importance of any one consideration will vary from development to development and will evolve over the lifetime of a single development. This does not mean that developers and architects cannot use lessons from one project to guide design of another— only that they need to do so with sophistication.

Site Design

47

Designing Landscaping Properly designed landscaping can cut energy costs, reduce soil erosion, and humanize open spaces. Trees in particular are important because they can shade buildings from summer sun, and so reduce cooling costs. In one study called “Cooling our Comunities”, trees placed around buildings cut cooling demand 60 percent.1 Trees can also protect parking lots, play areas, and sidewalks by reducing ambient temperatures, blocking winds, and providing shelter for people and wildlife. And if the trees are well-placed, they will require minimal maintenance over the long run.

When appropriate, green landscaping should use as many native plants as possible, including grasses and hedges. This will provide natural habitat for insects, birds, and other wildlife.

And since native plants are adapted to local conditions, they will need less watering and pesticide treatment. Conventional lawns require a lot of watering and fertilizer application, yet do not absorb water well, leading to large amounts of often-polluted runoff. They also require heavy maintenance (mowing and fertilizing) and even periodic replacement.

Therefore, landscape designers should be careful not to use grass lawns when other types of plantings are more environmentally appropriate and as acceptable to residents. A children’s play area, for instance, can have a small lawn area surrounded by other types of plantings. Vegetated areas along streets and walkways, on the other hand, should be landscaped with types of plantings other than lawns in order to provide drainage for surface runoff.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Landscaping Measures

• Utilize existing trees and shrubbery when possible. Fence them off during construction to avoid direct damage and root impaction from heavy machinery. Use the diameter of the tree’s crown to estimate the width of its root zone. Be especially cautious about where subcontractors park trucks and machinery.

48

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

• Consider building orientation (see Chapter 4 for passive solar design) and the path of the sun in designing landscaping. Draw a sun exposure chart, showing how much sun will reach each part of the site during dif ferent seasons (taking into account shadows cast by buildings and tall trees). Place shade- or sun-tolerant plants at various locations as appropriate.

• Use native plant species, which require less maintenance since they are better adapted to local pests, soil, and climate. Native species can be particularly valuable in dry climates, where use of them has been shown to require 30–50 percent less water than conventional landscaping.2 Native, edible flora also help maintain pockets of biodiversity by providing better wildlife habitat.

• Design landscaping with security in mind. Shrubbery may shelter criminal activity; however, on the perimeter, it might soften the appearance of security fences. Consider using holly and raspberry bushes near ground-floor windows as a deterrent to break-ins.

Another strategy is to use a two-tiered system, consisting of trees higher than ten feet combined with groundcover lower than two feet. This design provides shade and natural greenery but denies eye-level cover for criminal activity and loitering. (See “Landscaping Maintenance” section in Chapter 7.) Always try to maximize the visibility of open spaces to people in them or near them.

• Avoid planting trees or bushes with poisonous fruit near childcare and playground areas.

• Provide as much space as possible for trees and shrubbery. These plants will capture and store runoff, improving the drought tolerance of the landscaping while protecting the site’s natural hydrology. (See Chapter 2.) It will also give trees and shrubbery space for many years of growth. A tree typically needs some 30 square feet of soil for its roots to grow, and enough airspace to reach maturity without heavy pruning.3 The more soil provided for trees, the less likely they will be to buckle pavement.

• Consider building a few large green spaces rather than many small ones (such as tree containers). In addition to being better for plants and runoff filtration, larger spaces provide settings that are better for child’s play and wildlife. Clusters of trees can shelter shade-tolerant ground cover, resulting in more biological diversity. If trees must be isolated and surrounded by pavement, provide plastic root barriers and deep watering tubes to guide root growth downward away from surface pavement.

Site Design

49

Preventing Water Pollution Every building site is part of a watershed. All development, therefore, contributes to watershed degradation through “non-point-source pollution,” including motor oil, heavy metals, fertilizer, and pesticides from roads, lawns, landscaping, and cleaning activities. Pavement also prevents rainwater from infiltrating the ground and elevating the site’s natural water table. (See “Conducting a Site Inventory” section in Chapter 2.)

Of particular concern to regulators and zoning boards are development sites adjacent to lakes, bays, wetlands, streams, and other waterways. These are also more likely to be subject to stricter regulations on stormwater discharge. Elsewhere, new regulations are making water pollution control important for all housing developments. Thus, how a development affects local water quality should be a major concern for all developers.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Water Pollution Prevention Measures

• Consult local regulations on stormwater system requirements as early as possible during the design phase to assure compliance.

• Make use of permeable surfaces wherever possible. Permeable surfaces let rainwater and irrigation water seep into the soil. Soil is an effective watershed protector, filtering water as it percolates slowly down to the water table. In parking areas, consider laying porous pavement, which is permeable. When appropriate, build pedestrian surfaces, such as walkways and patios, with loose aggregate, wooden decks, or well-spaced paving stones.

• Protect a site’s existing soils during construction, unless they are contaminated. Excavate native topsoil and stage it in a fenced-off area. This original soil can be used later for native landscaping and drainage filtration systems.

50

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

• Protect waterways during construction. Install silt fences, for example, to hold sediment on-site.

• Plan little-used vehicular areas, such as parking stalls (especially over-flow parking) and emergency access lanes, as unpaved or porouspaved surfaces.

• Minimize the use of heavy landscape irrigation, which can cause erosion. Minimize the application of herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, and fertilizers. (See Chapter 7.)

Other Water Pollution Prevention Measures

• Concentrate stormwater runoff into vegetated swales instead of rain gutters or pipes, a method known as biofiltration. This reduces runoff leaving a site and can reduce infrastructure costs. It also decreases soil erosion and the need for irrigation. Consider routing rainwater downspouts into natural infiltration areas such as gravel-lined pits.

Water detention basins can also be used to provide a controlled outflow of water, again preventing erosion.

• Use cisterns and other rainwater collection systems to save water for irrigation.

Site Design

51

Designing for Security In high-crime urban areas, the need for security can overwhelm all other needs. For example, when residents decide to keep windows closed for fear of intruders, natural ventilation strategies will not work. When courtyards are sites of nightly gunfire or drug sales, no resident will be able to appreciate the watershed benefits of the native shrub that provides cover for such activity. This does not mean that it is impossible to build well-landscaped developments in highcrime areas. It does mean that designers need to find ways to reconcile competing concerns. For instance, planting trees that shade but do not block views or can be climbed, possbily creating a security risk. (Security is also an operations and maintenance issue. See “Maintaining Security” section in Chapter 7.)

Designing the Exterior for Security The greatest security concerns relate to the exterior environment.

Though every site will have somewhat different security needs, the following are generally applicable design rules.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Exterior Security Measures

• Make sure that exterior circulation and outdoor areas are visible from within buildings. This is crucial to reducing unwanted congregation and crime in what may otherwise become no-man’s-lands. If you cannot iden tify who “owns” a space in the sense of watching it, then assume that it will be taken over by outsiders, perhaps including gang members and drug dealers. Building windows projecting outward over streets or court yards is one way to help residents keep their eyes on public areas.

• For the same reason, design all exterior areas to invite resident use.

Giving residents reasons to use and pass by spaces is often overlooked as a strategy in deterring crime. Scattered retail establishments, community gardens, childcare facilities, and playgrounds spread foot traffic around a development, reducing the number of unwatched

52

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

areas even as they enrich residents’ lives and give them more reasons to care about (and take care of) their neighborhood.

• Choose exterior lighting fixtures that are durable (bulletproof) and multifunctional (for example, providing both area and walkway lighting). Make sure the fixtures are secure in order to prevent vandalism, but easily accessible to maintenance personnel.

Other Exterior Security Measures

• Design front stoops and porches that are large enough to use as living spaces and that have a clear view of the surrounding areas.

This will give residents a vantage point from which to watch street activity.

• If perimeter walls or fencing are thought necessary, try softening the resulting institutional look with landscaping, trees, artwork, and open designs that allow light and breezes to flow in and give views outward. Consider building walls or fencing using non-linear designs, such as zigzags and waves.

Designing the Interior for Security Security issues inside buildings are less pressing than those outside, particularly when exterior security issues are effectively addressed.

The following interior security techniques, however, can be particularly useful for units that front onto streets in high crime neighborhoods.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Interior Security Measures

• Design hallways, stairways, and other interior common spaces so that they are easily observable from residential units. Stairways, for instance, can have windows—or in more temperate climates, can be open-air. This will make these internal “streets” safer, just as observability makes real streets safer.

• Install security bars on windows and doors if necessary so that groundfloor residents can keep them open for natural ventilation without sacrificing security. (By law in many areas, these must be removable from the inside in case of fire.)

Endnotes 1. Lisa Gartland, “Cooling Our Cities,” The Urban Ecologist, No. 1 1997, p. 5.

2. Michael Myers, Sustainable Building Technical Manual, Part I I I, Washington, DC. Public Technology, 1996, p I I I. 45.

3. Gartland, ibid.

Site Design

53

Chapter 4

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality Introduction The Building Envelope Incorporating Renewable Energy Daylighting Passive Solar Heating Passive Cooling Active Solar Energy Use Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems Ensuring Healthy Indoor Air

Introduction Chapter 3 explained what the greening of affordable housing development means for site choice and design. This chapter moves indoors, looking at the building envelope and energy-using systems. Perhaps more than any other design element, these two components determine a development’s environmental impact through their influence on energy use. They also heavily influence indoor air quality.

At its worst, inadequate design of these two components can make buildings costlier to build and maintain, make them uncomfortable, increase maintenance needs, and create moisture problems, threatening the health of buildings and occupants alike. At its best, it can make buildings less expensive, healthier, and more comfortable to live in while minimizing environmental impact. Consider the example of two Chicago-based affordable housing developers, Pilsen Resurrection Development and the Isaiah Community Development Group. They have formed a joint venture to build energy-efficient homes guaranteed to keep heating costs at $200 per year in a region where monthly heating bills often peak that high in winter. Their key technique is to substitute investment in insulation and airtightness for investment in large heating systems.

As this example suggests, the most economical way to design for energy efficiency is to think about the building envelope first, since it can capture or block energy at almost no cost if properly designed. As designers refine envelope design they should then meet with heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) specialists to determine how efficient mechanical system design can provide further savings.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

57

Residents’ needs and activity patterns also have to be factored into the design. For passive solar heating to work well, for example, residents may need to close blinds or drapes when their building gets too hot. This requirement may make the technique inappropriate for housing intended for people who are elderly or handicapped.

Finally, designers need to think about the effects these choices will have on indoor air quality, which is discussed in the last section of this chapter. Airtightness can lead to the build-up of indoor air pollutants unless a proper ventilation system is also installed.

Improper HVAC design can also lead to moisture and mold problems.

Since building materials selection also affects indoor air quality, this topic will also be discussed in this chapter.

58

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

The Building Envelope The envelope, “shell,” or “skin” of a building includes the walls, vapor barrier, insulation, windows, doors, roof, and flooring. The various parts of the envelope should protect structural members from moisture build-up, reduce heat leakage, bring in light, and prevent pest problems.

One of the most important and tricky challenges in designing an envelope is to install a tight, well-insulated shell to save energy while providing large openings for natural daylight and ventilation.

Following are some of the more important envelope design strategies. Each of these strategies reduces the need for furnaces, air conditioners, and lights, cutting construction and operating costs.

Indeed, savings on construction costs alone often compensate for higher investment in the envelope.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Envelope Measures

• Fill the largest air gaps around windows and doors, between walls and floors, near ceilings, in floors, etc., with long-lasting caulk or other low-toxicity sealing material. Give attention to construction details, especially where wiring, plumbing, and ducts penetrate the envelope or where dropped soffits and chaseways are used. All units can be tested for air leakage using a blower door and pressure gauges.

• In retrofits, weather-strip doors and windows carefully place sealing gaskets and latches on all operable windows. In new construction, select windows with air leakage rates of less than 0.3 cfm per square foot and install according to manufacturer’s specifications.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

59

• Depending on local climate, consider placing vapor retarders in attic ceilings, floors, and wall stud bays in order to prevent moisture condensation in the building frame. Tightly sealing drywall with caulk, gaskets or other sealants, however, might make the use of vapor retarders unnecessary. Check with local builders and follow their recommendations.

• Make sure ventilation is adequate to prevent moisture build-up within the building envelope.

• In warm climates, use exterior cladding and roofing materials with high reflectivity (usually light-colored) to reduce solar gain.

• Avoid the use of steel studs for framing in colder climates unless a thermal break or an exterior sheathing of rigid insulation is used.

Steel is extremely efficient at transmitting heat, and can counteract the effects of insulation.

• Use energy-efficient framing techniques to improve insulation coverage in walls and ceilings. Rigid insulation can often be used in place of structural sheathing in non-corner areas, and use of cross bracing can allow rigid insulation to be used on all exterior areas.

Other Envelope Measures

• Tape and seal all exterior sheathing seams to further reduce air infiltration, or install a housewrap, paying close attention to manufacturer’s installation instructions.

• Consider using insulation levels in walls, floors, and ceilings that exceed minimum requirements in the 1995 Model Energy Code.

• In cold climates, use double-paned windows with energy-efficient frames that have a U-value (a measure of heat transfer) appropriate for the local climate. Also consider double-paned windows with low-e coating or gas filling. The National Fenestration Ratings Council, in Silver Spring, Maryland, provides U-value ratings and certifications.

• Select appropriate glazings for windows as well. As with other forms of insulation, which glazings are appropriate depends on local temperature patterns. It also depends on which direction the windows will face.

60

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Incorporating Renewable Energy Renewable energy comes from several sources, including the sun and the wind. In affordable housing, the most practical renewable energy use is to heat with solar energy.

Solar energy can be utilized through “passive” or “active” design techniques. “Passive solar” refers to letting the sun shine through windows, skylights, or other openings for lighting and heating. Passive solar designs may or may not require extra up-front investment. Active solar energy systems, on the other hand, rely upon electrical or mechanical equipment to harness the sun’s energy, and do entail up-front costs, sometimes significant ones. One example is photovoltaics, which do have significant up-front costs, but virtually no maintenance costs. They will be discussed in the following section.

A national solar energy initiative currently being advanced is “The Million Solar Roofs Initiative” which will enable businesses and communities to install solar systems on one million rooftops across the United States by 2010. The U.S. Department of Energy will lead this initiative by working with partners in the building industry, local governments, state agencies, the solar industry, electric service providers, and non-governmental organizations to remove market barriers and strengthen grassroots demand for solar technologies.

Buildings can also capture wind energy through simple passive techniques. Cross-ventilation can provide natural ventilation and cooling.

Solar and wind energy measures need to be addressed early in the design process, during decisions about site layout and building orientation (See Chapter 3). Turning a building 90 degrees, for example, can radically affect its ability to capture sun or wind energy.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

61

Daylighting Daylighting brings outdoor light into buildings, reducing the need for artificial light sources. In residential buildings, daylighting is most effectively employed in stairwells and corridors, providing free light for security and safety during the daytime.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Daylighting Measures

• For stairwells and corridors, use skylights, roof monitors, and other openings when possible to reduce the need for electric security and safety lighting that would typically be on 24 hours a day.

• Use tall windows. The higher the daylighting source, the more light it will generally capture. Consider placing windows near corners of rooms so that light coming in will bounce off the walls adjacent to the windows and spread through the rooms.

• Consider north-facing windows in all but the coldest of climates.

These windows receive little or no direct solar gain (thus little glare) but can provide diffuse daylighting. However, in cold climates, the heat loss through these windows may not justify the benefit.

• Make sure daylighting does not end up increasing cooling loads. The best ways to do this are to reduce the number and size of east- and west-facing windows, which get the most direct sun, and to provide proper shading for south-facing windows.

Passive Solar Heating Builders can use passive solar heating to take advantage of the sun’s free heat with almost none of the costs of conventional heating equipment. There can be some modest up-front costs, however. Some passive solar systems use thermal storage materials such as masonry strategically placed to absorb the heat of the sun’s rays during the hot parts of the day and then release it during the cooler hours.

Passive solar heating may also require more insulation and more supervision from occupants or maintenance staff to close blinds and drapes at certain times.

Passive solar design possibilities are often overlooked during site selection and building design, particularly in urban areas; many people seem to assume that passive solar is impractical in a dense, urban setting. But as the Plaza del Sol and Esperanza del Sol Case Examples in this chapter show, it can be practical even in urban infill developments. It can also be exploited in rehabilitation developments, particularly in gut rehabilitations, though typically with less effect than in new construction. And passive solar gains can occur even on cloudy and overcast days or in the middle of winter when outdoor temperatures are well below freezing.

62

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

No-Cost/Low-Cost Passive Solar Heating Measures

• Start thinking about passive solar during site selection and design.

Favor site layouts that will orient buildings to take the best advantage of the southern exposure vital for passive heating in winter.

• Optimize the amount of window area facing south with corresponding thermal mass.

• In colder climates, decrease window area facing north. Even the best windows are relatively poor insulators compared to well-insulated walls, and north-facing windows bring in relatively little solar energy.

• Use both “direct” and “indirect” thermal storage. “Direct” thermal storage mass is mass placed in the path of sunlight, for example, in floors adjacent to south-facing windows. Use low-cost materials such as reclaimed bricks and ceramic tile. Darker materials generally store more heat.

“Indirect” thermal storage is mass that will receive little direct sunlight but will absorb ambient heat during hot parts of the day and release it at cooler times, damping temperature swings. It can be placed anywhere in a building, and can be any color.

Interior walls not reached by the sun, for instance, can be built with double-thick layers of gypsum board. (For even lower costs and greater resource efficiency, place damaged gypsum board or scraps of gypsum board that might otherwise be thrown away in the stud cavities.)

Other Passive Solar Heating Measures

• For somewhat more costly direct thermal storage (but also more cost-effective in appropriate climates), build insulated floors, slab-on-grade, 4–6” deep. Avoid covering with carpet or furniture.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

63

Case Study: Plaza del Sol, San Francisco, California.

Themes:

Solar orientation and design; water conservation; safety;

infill development integration into fabric of existing neighborhood.

Techniques:

Open courtyards for solar exposure and good cross-ventila-

tion; open stairways and light portals for daylighting; clustering of vegetation to reduce irrigation needs.

Benefits:

Lower utility bills for residents; reduction in management’s

spending for outdoor lighting and water use; access to sunny, open spaces that are safe; good fit with local neighborhood.

Plaza del Sol is a 59-unit, gated infill development in a high-crime neighborhood in San Francisco, California. It was designed to make extensive use of daylighting and other passive renewable energy techniques. One distinguishing feature of the development is a 30-foot setback along the southern property line, created in order to provide maximum year-round solar exposure for the buildings.

(See Figure 1.) (The Centro Del Pueblo building, just to the south, is three stories tall.) This setback area (“B” and “L” on the schematic) receives sun year-round, morning through afternoon, and has been made into a landscaped plaza. Similarly, the placement of two central courtyards (“F” and “M”) maximizes cross-ventilation and daylighting opportunities.

Buildings are designed to bring in light and air through features such as stairwells with pierced-metal casing and skylights at the top, light portals, and light passageways. Outward-opening louvered windows are intended to scoop in light breezes on warm or hot days. All units have front and rear orientations to allow cross-ventilation and morning and afternoon daylighting, and to provide residents access to public and private spaces from their homes. (Private gardens are marked by “N” in the figure.)

The exteriors of the top three stories in the four-story building are made of lightly colored textured plaster to provide high reflectivity without glare.

The developers’ goal was to provide good access to sunny, open spaces, hoping residents would allow children to play on-site, where they require less supervision. The strategy was successful: the central court and play areas are filled with children during all hours of the day and well into the evening. This safe haven is valuable since the closest park is more than five crime-plagued blocks away.

The landscaping includes large clusters of trees and plants in unpaved areas (such as Glade “G”). The large amounts of open soil increase the site’s ability to store moisture, helping trees thrive,

64

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

particularly during seasonal droughts. Such green clusters also make for less rainwater runoff, less pavement cracked and buckled by tree roots, and less need for outdoor plant watering.

Plaza del Sol also provides an excellent example of a development that fits in with its neighborhood. It was built around an existing structure housing a theater and arts center. It shares a childcare center with a community center next door. In addition, residents benefit from the center’s classes in arts and crafts, English as a second language, and computer use. It also houses two live-in tutors for children.

Management employs many residents in maintenance and operations departments, including a full-time resident advisor who helps residents solve maintenance and operation problems and administrative issues.

Sources: Bobbi Sue Hood, Architect, Hood Miller Associates, San Francisco, CA, discussion with author, March 1997; Hood Miller Associates, Plaza Del Sol project literature (San Francisco, CA: undated).

Figure 1.

Site Plan: Plaza del Sol 440 Valencia Street, San Francisco

Key A.

Sun Gate

B.

Paseo del Serpiente

C.

Pergola with Picnic Tables

D.

Community Room

E.

Bridge to Jaguar Court

F.

Jaguar Court

G.

Glade with Faucet, Serpentine

Source: Hood Miller Associates

Bench, and River H-3.

3-Story Housing

H-4.

4-Story Housing

I.

Gate to Childcare

J.

Children’s Play Area Shared with

K.

Stairs to Level 2, Centro del Pueblo

L.

Zocalo

M.

Humming Bird Court

Childcare for Centro Pueblo

N.

Private Gardens on Grade

P.

4-Bedroom House

Q.

Entrance to Credit Union

R.

Entrance to Centro del Pueblo

S.

Controlled Entrance to Housing

T.

Housing Manager’s office

U.

Resident‘s Laundry

V.

Palm Court (Part of Tricycle Loop)

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

65

Case Study: Esperanza del Sol, Dallas, Texas.

Green

Energy efficiency; renewable energy use.

Techniques: Benefits:

Extra insulation; passive solar heating.

Residents’ utility bills are half the usual amount for the area;

reduced air infiltration

Esperanza del Sol is a 12-unit, single-family affordable housing infill development in Dallas, Texas. The builder, BBH Enterprises, used special techniques such as employing an exterior air retarder system, which relies on extensive caulking, sealing, and gasketing, to achieve high airtightness. To protect indoor air quality, the designers specified a controlled ventilation and air distribution system. The three-bedroom, two-story homes needed only 1.5 tons of cooling each, compared to an average for Dallas homes their size of 2.5 tons, saving $1,000 per home on heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment. The airtightness also allowed BBH to save another $750 per home by installing a low-flow air distribution system that uses voids in floor trusses as ductwork rather than more costly and laborintensive metal ducts. (This type of air distribution must be installed with care to make sure it is tight and does not leak to the outside.)

Extra costs for insulation, the air retarder system, and the controlled ventilation system totaled $1,900. Less the savings on HVAC and ductwork, this increased construction costs by only $150. But with utility bills at only half the usual level for the area, the savings of $300 a year per house are enough to cover the extra up-front costs in six months.

Source: Burke Miller Thayer, Esperanza del Sol: Sustainable, Affordable Housing, Solar Today, May/June 1994, pp. 20–23.

66

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Passive Cooling Passive cooling strategies reduce the need for air conditioning and fans. They include cross-ventilation, placing windows to minimize penetration by summer sun, and using shades or shade trees.

Natural ventilation can also improve indoor air quality by supplementing mechanical ventilation.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Passive Cooling Measures

• Orient buildings to capture prevailing winds. (See “Conducting a Site Inventory” section in Chapter 2.)

• Place smaller openings (windows) on the sides of buildings that face prevailing winds and larger openings (doors, larger windows) on the opposite sides. This design increases pressure differentials, causing more air movement through buildings.

• Build overhangs 24–36” deep at the south side rooflines of buildings to shade windows, doors, porches and patios from hot midday sun in spring, summer, and fall. Overhangs on the east, west and north sides of buildings are also useful because they protect the envelope from rain and make it easier to leave windows open on hot, rainy days.

If such large overhangs are impractical, any overhang is still preferable to none, especially on the south side of buildings.

• Use awnings or exterior solar shade screens to shade window openings. Interior window shades or blinds do not work as well because they allow heat to penetrate windows. Still, light-colored interior shades or blinds are preferable to none at all since they reflect light back outside.

• In hot climates, limit the number and sizes of windows facing east or west. These windows gain a substantial amount of solar energy during warm seasons. But increase window area on north and south sides; windows here can provide excellent ventilation without causing overheating. North-facing windows generate little solar gain; those on the south side generate gain mostly in winter.

• Landscape with deciduous trees to provide shade in the hot parts of the year—when the trees have leaves. Shade is most needed on the west side of a building, which receives sun on hot afternoons.

• Place trellises or arbors on buildings so climbing plants can shade patios, walkways, and windows.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

67

Active Solar Energy Use Active solar systems use electronic or mechanical equipment to capture the sun’s energy for heating or power generation. Active solar design strategies should be taken up only after passive solar and other simple energy efficiency approaches have been fleshed out, since active systems cost more to build and maintain. Similarly, when active systems are cost-effective, it makes sense to opt for the simplest designs since these will require minimal human intervention and maintenance.

Solar water heaters are the most common type of active solar system in affordable housing. Typically, they are mounted on rooftops facing south. Solar water heaters often come with a gas-fired back-up system in case of mechanical problems, downtime for maintenance, or unusually cloudy weather.

Photovoltaic (PV) or solar cells are another active technology for harvesting solar energy. They convert sunlight directly into electricity. Though used primarily in small, off-grid applications, simple photovoltaic systems can provide dependable and cost-effective power for lighting walkways and building grounds. A small PV panel mounted on a light pole can collect solar energy during the day, charging a battery for nighttime use. Motion-sensor-controlled PVpowered security lighting is another application of this technology appropriate for affordable housing developments. PV-charged batteries can also provide power back-up for security lighting.

68

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems After determining how to cost-effectively maximize renewable energy use, designers should turn to the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. The more these earlier decisions can reduce mechanical HVAC needs, the smaller and cheaper the HVAC system can be. Thus the key to cost-effective, energy-efficient HVAC design is to view mechanical systems as parts of a larger picture. This balanced approach will produce buildings that operate differently than standard ones, which are often effectively designed to be uncomfortable, and can only be made livable through giant, expensive HVAC systems. This does not mean, however, that HVAC designers and engineers should be left out of the early design process. Designers need to give their feedback on basic decisions such as where to run ductwork.

HVAC systems, like other components in a green development, need to be designed with several concerns in mind, including the desire for energy efficiency, life cycle cost minimization, and the need for healthy indoor air.

No-Cost/Low-Cost HVAC Measures

• Use special-purpose software to simulate building energy demand and estimate equipment needs.

• Match HVAC system capacity to load requirements. These are determined by how well renewable energy is exploited and how efficient the skin is, along with climate and safety considerations, special needs of elderly or disabled residents, and other factors.

• Good ductwork design, installation, and sealing are crucial to HVAC performance. Ductwork should run through climate-controlled areas.

This is most likely to happen if ductwork routing is completely planned during the design stage, not left until later. One study found that in single family homes forced-air ductwork running outside conditioned space can lose 15–30 percent of conditioned air. If duct work must run outside conditioned areas, it should be well sealed and insulated, and the seals should be tested.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

69

•Seal ductwork with quality fiber-reinforced mastic, high efficiency liquid sealants, or other low-leakage, durable sealants. Do not use cloth duct tapes, which are prone to drying and cracking.

• Balance the air supply being distributed to each room based on the calculated room loads. Make sure return grills and ducts are adequate to maintain desired air flow and balanced flow to each room by locating at least one return grill on each floor of a house.

• For multifamily buildings, test HVAC systems after installation to ensure that they can meet design loads. In developments consisting of single-family homes, test the first houses that are completed.

• Consider buying high-efficiency heating and cooling equipment.

• Specify properly sized, high-efficiency motors in components such as fans and actuators. These save energy and require less maintenance.

• Size equipment with Manuals “J” and “S” and size ducts with Manual “D.” Other HVAC Measures

• Consider using whole-house fans for single-family houses, mounted in attics. In mild climates, and in buildings designed according to principles listed in earlier sections of this chapter, fans can eliminate the need for air conditioning. In hotter climates, they can reduce it.

Whole-house fans also improve ventilation.

• Consider using innovative heating and cooling systems. In the dry Southwest and mountain regions, evaporative coolers can work more efficiently than conventional air conditioners.1 • Consider combination space/water heater units. These can reduce energy use, cut capital costs, and save space. They should be vented to the outside and draw combustion air directly from the outside for highest indoor air quality.

• Consider installing a water, electricity, or gas meter in each unit, rather than a master meter for a whole building. Assuming residents are not fully reimbursed by the government for their utility bills, this gives each resident more incentive not to waste resources. It can also help maintenance staff spot problems such as broken equipment. In addition, utility “demand-side management” programs (that fund customer investments in water or energy efficiency) generally target individually metered buildings. Note, however, that some housing providers prefer master metering as a way to average out utility costs among residents, particularly when some units house very low-income families, elderly people, or people with disabilities.

70

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Ensuring Healthy Indoor Air Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as formaldehyde, benzene, xylene, and toluene are emitted by many kinds of carpet, paint, insulation, furniture, and flooring. The chemicals come from bonding agents, glues, dyes, carpet backings, and fire retardants within these common furnishings. Unsafe levels of these chemicals in indoor air are often signaled by strong odors and health problems such as headaches, dizziness, eye irritation, and minor respiratory ailments.

An equally serious indoor air quality (IAQ) problem, particularly in high-rises, is that roof or pipe leaks and condensation inside HVAC systems can create environments in which mold, mildew, dust mites, and insects can thrive. This problem can be difficult for the non-professional to detect.

The elderly, people with AIDS, and young children are particularly susceptible to indoor air pollution.2 The first two groups are vulnerable because of their weak immune systems and frequent respiratory ailments. Children are vulnerable because they have higher respiratory rates and are closer to pollutant sources such as carpeting and furniture.

To prevent IAQ problems, designers and building managers need to combine several strategies. First, they need to reduce the sources of pollution, for example by airing out construction materials and furniture before installing them. Second, they need to provide natural ventilation and/or mechanical ventilation. Finally, they need to implement maintenance procedures that will prevent HVAC systems from becoming a source of pollution and prevent ventilation performance from declining over time. (See Chapter 7.)

No-Cost/Low-Cost Indoor Air Pollution Source Reduction Measures

• Specify low-toxicity building materials, adhesives, and finishes.

• Air out furniture, materials, and construction areas thoroughly. If something smells strongly, it is usually an indoor air quality risk and should be aired out more. A staging area with open walls and a roof to block the rain is the best place to do this. Materials or furniture should be left there for days or even weeks. Do not use “bake-outs”—turning up

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

71

the heating system in a finished unit for up to a week. Bake-outs have been shown to be ineffective, and may create more IAQ problems than they solve.

• Keep windows and doors open during construction and rehabilitation.

• Develop guidelines to educate residents and staff about furnishings that worsen indoor air quality.

• Consider recycled and water-based paints, which generate little or no VOC emissions, and are available from major manufacturers.

• Minimize pollution from carpets, one of the greatest sources of residential IAQ problems. In addition to being a chemical source, once installed, carpeting becomes a reservoir for dirt, mold, and pesticides.

(Also, seven percent of urban landfill is carpeting, and manufacturing it causes substantial pollution.) Purchase carpets that are as odor-free as possible. Use a non-toxic, felt-type underpad, or zero-VOC glue.

Or instead of carpeting, use easily cleaned, durable surfaces made from natural linoleum, cork, tile, or wood.

• If sheet vinyl flooring is used, affix it with a non-toxic adhesive. But since vinyl emits air pollutants too, and since its manufacture is a major pollution source, use it sparingly, if it all.

• When using gypsum board, consider a low-toxicity joint compound that contains no formaldehyde.

• Use low-toxicity caulks, such as 100-percent silicone products.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Ventilation Measures

• Use mechanical ventilation in kitchens and bathrooms without windows, as required by code. Use quiet fans or consider mounting fans remotely to reduce noise. Even in bathrooms with windows, a fan can be good for removing moisture and odors.

• Vent kitchen range hoods and bathroom fans directly to the outside.

Kitchen range models that simply circulate air indoors are ineffective in removing odors, smoke, and other combustion byproducts.

• Design mechanical systems to at least meet the current American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) general ventilation standard, which in 1996 was known as 62-1989. Units housing residents with respiratory problems, the elderly and people with AIDS, may require extra ventilation, as may particularly densely occupied units.

72

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

• Educate residents on the importance of proper operation of mechanical ventilation systems as well as natural ventilation practices. (See Chapter 7.)

• Consider installing carbon monoxide monitors.

• Place ventilation intakes on rooftops away from air-polluted areas such as parking lots, busy roadways, and loading docks.

• Be aware that negative pressure from exhaust fans, clothes dryers, and other equipment can draw outside air in through furnace and water heater flues and draw combustion byproducts that should go out the flues into the rest of the house. Solutions to this problem include using fan-assisted combustion units; using combination water/space heating units with a fan-assisted water heater; or placing inexpensive natural-draft furnaces and water heaters outside the living area of the home, such as in an attached garage or sealed equipment closet. Never use natural draft flues inside living areas.3 Endnotes 1. Alex Wilson, Editor and Publisher, Environmental Building News, Brattleboro, VT, letter to author, August 14, 1997.

2. Debra Lynn Dadd, The Non-Toxic Home (Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher, 1986), p. 179.

3. Perry Bigelow, President, Bigelow Homes, Palatine, IL, letter to author, August 17, 1997.

Energy Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality

73

74

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Chapter 5

Using Resources More Efficiently in Design, Construction and Operations Introduction Conserving Water Indoors Minimizing Materials Impacts Materials Source Reduction Choosing Construction Materials Construction Waste Reduction Helping Residents Recycle Designing Buildings for Durability and Adaptability

Introduction Buildings consume tremendous amounts of energy. Because that energy use carries high financial and environmental costs, increasing energy efficiency is perhaps the single most important strategy for making housing greener and more affordable—but it is not the only one, as architects and builders are increasingly realizing.

This chapter will focus on other design and construction strategies that reduce a building’s environmental impact at little or no cost.

These strategies usually fall under the rubric of “resource efficiency.”

(See “What is ‘Resource Efficiency’?” sidebar in Chapter 1.)

Resource Efficiency

77

Conserving Water Indoors Water consumption by indoor fixtures can have major effects on the regional environment, particularly in areas subject to drought or water shortages. Installing water conserving systems and fixtures can considerably reduce water use in buildings while saving residents or building owners money. (See Chapter 3 for additional information on water conservation outdoors.)

No-Cost/Low-Cost Indoor Water Conservation Measures

• Install low-flow showerheads and faucets, models that use less than 2.5 gallons per minute. High-flow models use 3–5 gallons per minute.

Find out whether the local water company offers rebates to buyers of efficient fixtures.

• Install water-conserving toilets. These use less than 1.6 gallons per flush compared to older models that use 3–6 gallons. Here too, rebates are available in some areas.

Other Indoor Water Conservation Measures

• Research and consider new dishwashers that use less than half the water and energy of conventional units.

• Consider specifying front-loading washers, which spin on a horizontal axis and use less than 15 gallons of water per load, compared to a typical 50 gallons for conventional, top-loading washers. Front-loading washers also have no agitators, so clothes wear out more slowly.

And because the washers spin faster during the rinse cycle, less drying is needed, saving more energy.1 • Consider installing graywater systems, which recycle water from sources such as washing machines and showers for irrigation and other uses.

78

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Minimizing Materials Impacts Materials selection and use is very complicated. This is easily seen in the practice of life cycle analysis (LCA), which attempts to assess the environmental impacts of a building material from the point of extraction (say, in a forest or mine), through manufacture, distribution, use, and disposal. LCA looks at impacts of such activities as logging old-growth forests, copper smelting, shipping materials by boat or truck across the country, and landfilling construction waste.

In theory, a designer using LCA must then weigh all these impacts against considerations such as durability, cost, and indoor air quality effects—all in all, an impossible amount of information to collect and analyze.

Many rules of thumb have been developed to simplify materials use decisions. The well known “reduce, reuse, recycle” hierarchy, for example, contains much truth. First, use less material; then make it go further through reuse; and lastly, recycle when possible.

The life cycle of a material consists of four phases: raw materials extraction and processing; manufacturing; use; and disposal or reuse. According to the newsletter Environmental Building News, most of a building’s environmental impact occurs during the use phase through its effects on energy and water consumption and on indoor air quality.2 Thus designers and building managers should be especially mindful of impacts during this phase.

Materials Source Reduction One effective way to reduce the environmental impact of the materials used in a building is simply to use less. This is known as “materials source reduction.” Shrinking the footprint of a building and making more efficient use of space is one straightforward way to do this. But for a building of a given size, much more can be done to reduce harmful effects. Specifying highly durable materials (ones that will not need replacing often) is an effective strategy, particular-

Resource Efficiency

79

ly for high-use areas of buildings. Tile, for instance, usually lasts much longer than carpeting. Proper maintenance also increases longevity. (See Chapter 7.)

Another technique is “optimum value engineering” (OVE, also known as “smart framing” or “advanced framing”). OVE reduces the need for framing lumber through simple steps such as spacing framing members further apart. Wood is a large component of the materials flow into the construction business and of the waste stream coming out of it. Applying OVE to timber-framed buildings reduces the number of trees that are cut down and the amount of waste wood ending up in landfills.

No-Cost/ Low-Cost Optimum Value Engineering Measures

• Design buildings with wall dimensions that match common lumber dimensions, such as multiples of 4’, if possible, or multiples of 2’.

This often reduces the need for cutting lumber on-site, saving time and reducing scrap wood generation. Especially avoid dimensions a few inches over these standard lengths, as they may force builders to cut whole additional boards for just a few inches of wood.

• Dimension window and door openings to match stud spacing. Locate windows next to structural studs. This reduces the need for extra lumber for nailer boards and jack studs.

• Widen spacing of joists and studs. Spacing can often be safely increased from 16” to 24”. This reduces framing materials needs up to 30 percent while leaving more room for insulation. It also reduces the likelihood that warping or differential movement of framing members will cause drywall cracking.

• Use “in-line framing.” Align framing members such as trusses, studs, and joists to bear directly onto each other, transferring loads directly from roofs to foundations. This reduces the need for double top plates and headers.

• Design open floor plans when possible, reducing materials use for walls. Open floor plans are also useful in passive solar energy strategies. (See Chapter 4.) ¸

• Use manufactured roof trusses, floor trusses, and wall panels instead of traditional stick frame (joist by joist, stud by stud) construction.

This can reduce lumber use by more than 25 percent, and cut scrap generation. According to the Wood Truss Council of America, using preassembled components can cut total construction costs by 15 percent. They cost more but, because they are easier to assemble, they more than pay for themselves by saving labor.3

80

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

No-Cost/Low-Cost Materials Source Reduction Measures

• Use engineered lumber instead of conventional lumber for framing.

Engineered lumber consists of wood layers or particles bonded together with glue. Since engineered lumber can be made from almost any kind of tree, using it reduces demand for high-quality timber, helping preserve old-growth forests. Engineered lumber also resists warping, cracking, and splitting better than dimensional lumber, making it especially appropriate for horizontal members, which are subjected to more stress. Specify engineered lumber made with low-VOC glues. Even then, however, because of possible indoor air pollution, make sure engineered lumber is covered and well sealed. • Make exterior walls out of insulating materials such as foam blocks or insulated panels. This saves materials since less additional insulation is needed.

Case Study: Casa Verde Builders, Austin, Texas.

Themes: Materials efficiency, energy efficiency.

Techniques: A variety of methods for reducing energy and materials impacts; training of disadvantaged youth in such methods; partnerships Benefits: Lower energy bills for residents; lower labor costs for developer; resource conservation; job skills for disadvantaged youth.

In Austin, Texas, the non-profit American Institute of Learning (AIL) program employs and trains 70 young people (17 to 25 years old) in building homes, while paying them minimum wage. The customers are low-income, first-time homebuyers, some formerly homeless.

This program, known as Casa Verde Builders, uses many techniques to increase energy and resource efficiency. It began in 1993 as a partnership between AIL, the local Habitat for Humanity (HFH) affiliate, and the city government. The City of Austin’s Green Builder Program secured funding for the first home from Home Depot, Motorola, IBM, and other companies. AIL has since independently constructed about 30 homes using the following green construction techniques:

Resource Efficiency

81

Materials Efficiency

• Using roofs that are made from recycled aluminum and steel and warrantied to last 40 years.

• Choosing carpets and carpet pads made from recycled materials.

• Making flooring from engineered wood.

• Using stucco exteriors that have dye embedded in them and so never need painting. (Stucco also resists rot.)

• Building with concrete containing waste fly ash from power plant flue gas scrubbers instead of cement.

• Using recycled paint as exterior primer for window and doorframes.

• Favoring manufactured wood framing and metal studs over largedimensional lumber. Manufactured studs are finger jointed and metal studs are only used in the interior, to avoid thermal bridging.

Energy Efficiency

• Insulating above code requirements: R-30 for ceilings, R-15 for walls, and R-13 for floors.

• Utilizing a continuous attic ridge/soffit venting system, which reduces attic temperature and moisture build-up.

• Installing solar screens for windows, reflective roofs, and internal radiant barriers for the building shells to keep out unwanted solar heat.

• Placing whole-house and ceiling fans in living rooms and bedrooms for efficient cooling.

• Specifying windows with high insulation values and low-e glazings to reduce heating and cooling loss.

• Locating windows to provide natural cross-ventilation and daylighting.

• Installing air conditioners that exceed code efficiency requirements.

• Installing ducts of the highest standards (MADAIR standards) for safe and efficient operation.

Indoor Air Quality

• Using low-volatile-organic-compound (low-VOC) finishes.

• Installing cabinetry made with non-outgassing materials.

A study of an AIL-built home found that it used 30–40 percent less energy than conventionally constructed homes in the area.

Yet the program’s biggest environmental benefit may be more indirect; it has inspired the City of Austin to upgrade its standards for all residential construction.

82

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

The Case Verde Program has attracted many partners and sponsors, including the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s YouthBuild program; the Corporation for National and Community Service’s AmeriCorps program; Austin’s Human Services, Housing, and Urban Planning Department; and the city’s Energy and Planning Department.

Sources: Richard Halpin, American Institute of Learning, Austin, TX, discussion with author, April 10, 1997; Doug Seiter, Green Builder Program, Austin, TX, discussion with author, June 12, 1997; City of Austin, Green Habitat Learning Project: A Green Builder Model Home Project (Austin, TX: 1995).

Choosing Construction Materials Even after source reduction techniques have been used to their full potential, building materials will still be needed, leading to complicated choices about which to use. Some tips for choosing materials that are affordable and minimally damaging to the environment: No-Cost/Low-Cost Materials Choices

• Try to recycle lumber from demolished buildings. Many businesses now cater to the salvaged lumber market, and often such lumber is cheaper and of higher quality than new lumber.

• If purchasing new lumber, look for sources certified as well-managed and sustainably harvested. Sustainably produced timber is now available in many U.S. markets. ¸

• Consider products made from recycled plastic for decking, mud sills, and other non-structural functions.

• Use drywall, insulation, carpet, and ceramic tile with recycled content.

Do the same for landscaping walls, terraces, and pavement.

• Consider roofing materials with recycled content, such as recycled wood fiber or aluminum.

• Use recycled latex paint, made from a mixture of unused paint. Recycled paint may be inexpensive and comes in a variety of colors for interior and exterior use.

• Use concrete that is made with fly ash from power plant scrubbers instead of Portland cement. This puts what would otherwise be industrial waste to good use and saves energy, since cement production is energy intensive.

• When possible, specify carpeting and other products with take-back guarantees or leasing arrangements.

Resource Efficiency

83

Case Study: Rural Studio, Greensboro, Alabama.

Theme: Materials efficiency.

Techniques: Using locally available materials; using architecture students for labor.

Benefits: Lower design and construction costs; resource conservation; practical education for architecture students.

The architecture department of Auburn University in conjunction with the Department of Human Resources of Hale County, Alabama, has rebuilt three single-family homes and a church near Greensboro, Alabama, while making innovative use of recycled materials such as construction rubble, hay, old bottles, and used timbers. The program, called Rural Studio, is funded with a $500,000 endowment from the University.

One Rural Studio project, the “hay bale house,” was built to replace a shanty, home to a family with three children, that was on the verge of collapse. The supplies for the house cost only $16,500, and students provided labor and design work for free while receiving school credit and valuable “hands-on” experience. The house is now roofed with acrylic and the walls are built mostly of hay and stucco, providing good insulation in this hot climate. Structural wood for framing was salvaged from abandoned farms and shacks. To build the smokehouse the family now uses to smoke fish, students even used old road signs and old bottles (mixed with concrete) as materials.

Sources: Michael Ryan, “Houses from Scratch,” Parade, April 6, 1997, pp. 14–15; Sam Mockbee, Professor of Architecture, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, discussion with author, June 3, 1997.

84

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Rural Studio Project, Greensboro, Alabama Goat House, designed by thesis students Josh Cooper and Ian Stewart Photo by D.K Ruth

Construction Waste Reduction The design phase is the key time to think about reducing materials use, but more materials can be saved once construction gets underway. Builders can reduce construction waste (including hazardous waste) by generating less of it or by reusing it on-site.

They can reuse bricks and broken concrete from demolished paving and foundations, for instance, for foundation fill, walkway pavement, or landscape terracing. And if they minimize generation of hazardous wastes, such as used motor oil, solvents, and paint, they will reduce the risk of being held liable for illegal waste disposal.

Two Chicago-area based affordable housing providers have developed one innovative approach to construction waste reduction.

Nonprofit Bethel New Life and private builder Bigelow Homes use material from demolished buildings on redeveloped sites as fill under new buildings’ reinforced-concrete grade foundations. This has saved materials and sped up construction.4 No-Cost/Low-Cost Construction Waste Recycling Measures 5

• Specify that materials, components, and equipment be shipped to the construction site using no packaging or recycled packaging. A large share of construction waste is cardboard.

• Set up systems for planning lumber cuts in order to make the most efficient use of each piece of lumber. Save scraps for reuse in a designated area.

• Define waste management goals in bid solicitations. (See “Contracts and Contractors” section in Chapter 2.) For instance, the solicitations can specify an overall waste recycling/reuse goal of 70 percent and targets for categories such as wood products, concrete, and steel.

Bid packages should supply contact information for local recyclers.

• Have a contractor draw up a draft Waste Management Plan immediately after a bid is awarded. Early planning facilitates more effective waste management. The draft Waste Management Plan should contain: •

A projected inventory of the waste generated.

•

Lists of materials that can be recycled, reused, or returned to manufacturers, including: cardboard, paper, and packaging; clean dimensional wood and palette wood; beverage containers; landclearing debris; bricks; concrete; concrete masonry units (CMUs); asphalt; metal from banding, stud trim, ductwork, piping, rebar, roofing, and other trim; drywall; carpeting and pad; paint; asphalt roofing shingles; rigid foam; glass; and plastic.

Resource Efficiency

85

•

Lists of alternatives to landfilling for each material, as well as potential local buyers for each material. Contractors may be able to obtain this information from local waste management agencies. A rough rule of thumb is that if local tipping fees are more than $50 per ton, there will probably be many local buyers; if under $50 per ton, there will probably be few.

•

The estimated net cost savings or additional costs resulting from separating and recycling each material.

• After the developer or builder has determined which of the recycling options listed in the draft Waste Management Plan are acceptable, have the contractor submit the final Waste Management Plan.

It should specify when meetings will take place to discuss any unforeseen problems. It can also include procedure specifications for materials handling, management on site, and transportation, and for distribution of the plan to relevant parties, including the developer, architect, job supervisor, subcontractor, and construction manager.

Helping Residents Recycle Residential recycling is a major environmental success story in the United States. It has reduced the need for landfilling and waste incineration, and has reduced the demand for virgin materials, such as timber and aluminum, that are environmentally harmful to produce.

With proper design, affordable housing can add to this success story.

Materials salvaging and recycling can provide high quality materials to neighborhood or municipal recycling centers, generate local employment, and earn money for a development or its residents.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Residential Recycling Measures

• Consult community recycling centers and municipal solid waste authorities to determine which products and materials are most easily recycled.

• Identify local government agencies or nonprofit groups that can help affordable housing providers devise and implement recycling programs.

• Clearly mark recycling bins by material type. Mixing different kinds of materials makes them harder to recycle and reduces their economic value. Once materials start getting mixed together, residents may begin mistaking the bins for trash receptacles.

• Set up composting areas near gardens for food waste (excluding animal products). Keep separate from recycling areas for other materials. Use closed bins or screened open bins to keep pests out.

• Incorporate recycling bins into the design of the project to ease everyday recycling for residents.

86

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Designing Buildings for Durability and Adaptability To be as resource-efficient as possible, buildings should not be designed as “throwaway” products. They should be built to last, resulting in bankable values and less need for maintenance over time. And they should be designed to be adaptive, so that floor plans and other features can be changed with relative ease down the road.

The more adaptable they are, the less likely they are to be abandoned or demolished. In commercial buildings, floor plans can change as often as every three years, climate control systems can change every 7–15 years, and building envelopes can change every 20 years or so.6 The adaptive stresses on residential buildings may be lower, but they are still significant.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Durable and Adaptable Design Measures

• Design floor plans for flexibility, in order to accommodate changing needs of residents. (See West HELP Development Case Example in this chapter for an illustration.)

• Include features that would be useful in units that may someday be adapted to house senior citizens or people with disabilities. (for example hook-ups for bathroom safety bars). This makes particular sense in ground floor units, where people with health problems or disabilities are more likely to live.

• Specify materials and furnishings with long-term guarantees.

Fiber cement shingles, for instance, come with warranties for 40–50 years, about twice the length for asphalt shingles.

Other Durable and Adaptable Design Measures

• Use heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems that are flexible and modular rather than rigid and centralized. They should come with intelligent control systems that can coordinate several units and adapt as uses for various parts of a building change over time.

And they should be easily reconfigurable when new units are added or removed.

Resource Efficiency

87

• Consider using steel framing in interior walls since it is durable and allows surface materials to be easily replaced when necessary.

• Design buildings with the possibility of non-residential use in mind.

Consider making ground floor units convertible to retail, daycare, or educational facilities. Make provisions for extra electrical outlets, water hook-ups, and security and safety features.

Case Study: West HELP Development, Mount Vernon, New York.

Theme:

Building adaptability.

Technique:

Designing floor plans that can be reconfigured to meet

changing needs of residents.

Benefits:

Higher occupancy rate; depending on future needs, the

buildings may serve longer useful lives, reducing need for demolition and new construction.

West HELP, a non-profit housing provider in Mount Vernon, New York, owns and manages a 46-unit urban infill development that provides transitional housing for formerly homeless families. The development, consisting of two three-story buildings, was built in 1989 with funding from the New York State Housing Finance Agency and the Westchester County Department of Social Services. The architect was Cooper Robertson & Partners in New York City.

Both buildings originally consisted of one-bedroom apartments, and these were laid out in pairs and connected with lockable doors.

As a result, each pair can be easily converted into a combination of a two-bedroom apartment and a studio. Management has since taken advantage of this flexibility, reconfiguring apartments as families of various sizes have moved into and left the buildings. West HELP says the adaptable floor plan has helped it maintain higher occupancy rates by enabling the housing provider to accommodate a wide variety of potential residents.

Source: Michael Pyatok, Good Neighbors: Affordable Family Housing (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), pp. 172–75; Richard Hyman, West HELP Development, Greenburgh, NY, discussion with author, July 1997.

88

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Transitional Housing Courtesy of West HELP Development, Mount Vernon, New York

Endnotes 1. “Earth Smart: Building the Healthy, Efficient, Environmental Choice,� promotional literature, Portland General Electric, Portland, OR, undated, p. 37.

2. Environmental Building News, Vol 6, no. 1, January, 1997 3. Wood Truss Council of America, What We Learned by Framing tne American Dream (Madison, WI: 1996).

4. Perry Bigelow, President, Bigelow Homes, Palatine, IL, letter to author, August 17, 1997.

5. This section is based heavily on Triangle J Council of Governments, Waste Spec (Research Triangle Park, NC: 1995 and on Siegal & Strain, Architects, materials prepared for Alameda County (CA) Waste Management Authority and Source Reduction and Recycling Board (Emeryville, CA: 1996).

6. David Malin Roodman and Nicholas Lenssen, A Building Revolution: How Ecology and Health Concerns are Transforming Construction, Worldwatch Paper 124 (Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute, 1995, p. 17).

Resource Efficiency

89

Chapter 6

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings Introduction Redevelopment Infill Challenges and Strategies Brownfield Redevelopment Rehabilitation General Rehabilitation Considerations Rehabilitation Pre-Design Rehabilitation Design and Construction Retrofitting

Introduction Chapters 2–5 focused on the design and construction of new housing developments. This chapter shifts perspective to discuss recycling whole buildings and tracts of land through redevelopment, rehabilitation, and retrofitting. Governments are increasingly offering developers tax breaks and other incentives for reusing land and buildings in such ways, particularly at sites that are in city centers or are abandoned, decayed, or contaminated. This chapter will examine techniques for redevelopment, rehabilitation, and retrofitting. It will also discuss their costs and stumbling blocks.

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

93

Redevelopment Two common types of redevelopment are infill redevelopment and brownfield redevelopment. Brownfields tend to be large tracts of land formerly used by industry, rail yard operators, or the military—land that is often contaminated or at least carries the possibility of contamination and its associated legal liabilities. Infill development sites tend to be smaller and may carry only modest contamination risks.

Infill Strategies and Challenges Infill redevelopment places new buildings in existing communities.

Potential infill sites can be vacant or can contain abandoned buildings. Infill development in inner cities provide environmentally and economically sound alternatives to suburban sprawl. By lowering pressures for sprawl, it reduces the need for driving and the development of greenfield sites, such as prime agricultural land and open space. It also reduces the need for new infrastructure investment at the perimeters of cities.

Infill development in high-density areas, however, does face obstacles. Suitable development sites can be hard to find and once found, neighborhood opposition to growth can impede plans.

Furthermore, infill development can cost more than greenfield development because of higher land costs, higher hard costs (such as for parking structures not needed in the suburbs), and higher soft costs (such as higher impact fees for construction use permits).

One study found that urban infill projects can cost 23–90 percent more than comparable suburban developments.1 These percentages however, do not take into account the societal costs of suburban development including commuting costs and loss of open space and recreational opportunities These barriers may be shrinking, however, in response, some building codes are being revised to facilitate redevelopment. Chicago, for instance, has changed its code to allow affordable housing developers to use materials from demolished buildings—materials such as

94

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

concrete, masonry, and lumber—as fill under reinforced-concrete grade foundations for new buildings constructed on-site. Formerly, developers were required to haul demolition waste away, a costly process particularly since such materials are normally classified as hazardous.2 Redevelopment funding and tax incentives from local, state, and federal governments are also offsetting some redevelopment costs. These sources of money include federal community development block grants, enterprise zone funding, local redevelopment agency funding, tax credits, and open space and land preservation grants (money given because redevelopment of old sites reduces development pressure on new ones).

Lenders too are considering developing incentives for redevelopment. One innovative technique is the “location-efficient mortgage,” which grants buyers of centrally-located homes higher debt limits based on the idea that their expenditures on transportation will be lower than average, increasing their ability to meet mortgage payments. (See “Energy- and Location-Efficient Mortgages” section in Chapter 8.)

Brownfield Redevelopment The financial prospects for redevelopment are also improving for brownfields sites. These sites do often carry disadvantages of inadequate infrastructure and poor transportation access. On the other hand, they can be quite inexpensive. Moreover, many of these sites are not actually contaminated, and only the fear of litigation stops them from being developed. This is why cities such as Chicago, Cleveland, and Los Angeles have been building partnerships with potential redevelopers to indemnify them against liability for any cleanup that may be needed, and against other such risks.

Governments at all levels are targeting affordable housing as a prime redevelopment use for brownfields where contamination can be mitigated to meet state and federal standards. Some community groups and potential residents of affordable housing brownfield redevelopments, however, have expressed concern about the health effects of living on former brownfields, even ones the government declares safe. Some community groups have commissioned independent tests of such sites, providing them with additional data on which to base decisions.

As a strategy to aid affordable housing through commercial/ retail redevelopment, brownfield redevelopment can benefit local communities. It can help revitalize neighborhoods by providing housing and jobs in depressed areas. And as part of larger revitalization efforts, it can make communities and developers eligible for economic development funding. Recent federal tax changes, for instance,

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

95

allow certain environmental remediation costs to be deducted for income tax purposes. Targeted areas include U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Brownfields Pilot sites, “enterprise” and “empowerment” zones, population census tracts with a poverty rate higher than 20 percent, and certain commercial or industrial areas adjacent to such tracts. One nonprofit group that is working to make the most of such opportunities is the California Center for Land Recycling, in San Francisco. It is partnering with affordable housing builders interested in developing brownfield sites.

Case Study: Chinese Community Housing Corporation, San Francisco, California.

Themes:

Infill development; solar orientation and design.

Techniques: Benefits:

Leasing air rights; daylighting.

Lower development costs; additional income for air

rights lessors.

The Chinese Community Housing Corporation (CCHC) in San Francisco has twice used an innovative “air rights” leasing approach to cut the cost of providing housing for seniors in a dense, low-income neighborhood. The first instance occurred within a San Francisco Public Housing Authority project, where the CCHC purchased air rights to a parking lot belonging to the 31-unit Bayside Elderly Housing Project. The lost parking lot spaces were replaced with underground parking facilities in the new development. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development provided Section 202 (senior housing) funding for the project. Other government and private sources also provided funding.

The second development, the Larkin-Pine Senior Housing Project, is a four-story, 64-unit project—the first development ever built atop a U.S. post office. The two-story buffer between the street and the development, created by the post office beneath the addition, is ideal for security-conscious seniors in this high-crime area. In fact, the post office was originally designed with the expectation that the housing project would be piggybacked onto it, making structural retrofitting unnecessary.

As the project moved forward, however, postal workers became concerned about the noise and health hazards associated with having a construction site on top of their workplace. In response to their concerns, the CCHC reached an agreement with the local postal union that steel framing construction would take place between 5 and 11 PM only.

96

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Chinese Community Housing Corporation, San Francisco, California

Because the base of the addition is several stories up, it has better southern exposure than street-level developments have. Designers took advantage of this by maximizing southerly exposure. Apartments that receive the most natural lighting are intended for occupation by the eldest residents.

The development is also unusual in its financial arrangements.

CCHC negotiated a $1 million price for the air rights above the postal facility; it paid the postal service $565,000 of that up-front, and pays an average of $38,000 each year as a mortgage. City and state rental-housing construction funds and bank and limited-partnership sources all helped finance the development.

Source: Whitney Jones, Project Manager, Chinese Community Housing Corporation, discussion with author, April 16, 1997.

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

97

Rehabilitation Rehabilitation—recycling existing buildings—can be an excellent way to develop affordable housing development with minimal environmental impact. At its best, it takes less time and money than new development. For example, because the building already exists, preparing an environmental impact statement for construction is unnecessary. Neighborhood opposition, or “NIMBYism” (NIMBY stands for “not in my backyard”), is also less likely to impede rehabilitation projects than it is for new developments. Many communities support the reuse of historic or abandoned buildings for affordable housing as an alternative to demolition. In such communities, developers can satisfy several well-identified needs at once.

The environmental benefits of preserving buildings are many: existing material can be saved, limiting manufacturing and transportation impacts; and greenfield sites can be saved from new development, protecting land and reducing the need for costly new infrastructure.

Rehabilitation can also preserve cultural amenities, such as examples of historical architecture that give a neighborhood identity.

Moreover, preserving existing housing in inner cities can be the single most important step in shoring up struggling neighborhoods because it can stop money and people from flowing out of neighborhoods, stabilizing property values. Stable or increasing property values can lead other property owners to upgrade their buildings too, creating a “virtuous circle.” Thus, a few rehabilitation projects can catalyze reinvestment in an entire block or neighborhood.3

General Rehabilitation Considerations Although rehabilitation can have economic, environmental, and cultural advantages, it also brings to the development process a handful of new complications. In the worst cases, these can completely undo the hoped-for benefits.

98

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

The main drawback of rehabilitation is that characteristics of the existing site and building can limit the potential for energy efficiency measures such as passive solar heating and green landscaping. Building codes, including historic preservation rules, may also limit the types of materials, building envelopes, and finishes that can be used. During an affordable housing rehabilitation of a turn-of-the-century Eagles building in downtown Seattle, for example, the developer (the city’s Department of Housing and Human Services) learned that the existing casement windows would have to be preserved despite being extremely poor insulators. This discovery affected the apparent economics of the project considerably.

(Many historic preservation codes, however, do allow replacement of original features as long as it does not affect appearance.)

Certain priorities, such as the need for security or lead paint abatement, may loom particularly large in rehabilitations, absorbing large portions of a developer’s capital budget. Another constraint, especially for affordable housing developers, is that major investments—such as in energy efficiency—can result in buildings whose appraised values are much higher than the neighborhood average.

That can make improvements difficult to finance.4

Rehabilitation Pre-Design As in new construction, thorough pre-design preparation is important before embarking upon rehabilitation of existing structures.

Requests for Qualifications (RFQs), Requests for Proposals (RFPs), and specifications for materials sourcing and energy-using systems should all be drafted before signing into a development agreement.

(See “Contracts and Contractors” section in Chapter 2.)

The pre-design phase is also a good time to assess the constraints that an existing building places on a rehabilitation project. Factors to consider include the nature of the building’s envelope, its orientation, features that must be preserved, and the presence of any hazardous materials and finishes on-site, such as asbestos, fiberglass insulation, and lead-based paint.

Rehabilitation Design and Construction Following are guidelines for rehabilitations for affordable housing development. (Many guidelines for new developments also apply.

See Chapters 2–5.)

No-Cost/Low-Cost Rehabilitation Measures

• Identify hazardous materials such as asbestos pipe insulation and remove or mitigate them.

• Avoid buildings with severe damage, major structural problems, or potentially costly environmental problems—unless funding is available for mitigation.

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

99

• Salvage existing materials—wood, metal hardware, plumbing, drywall, concrete, fixtures, doors, cabinetry—for reuse, resale, or recycling.

• Look for water conservation opportunities. Old plumbing and water supply systems may leak and use water inefficiently (and harbor hazardous lead piping and lead soldering).

Other Rehabilitation Measures

• In gut rehabilitations, knock down internal walls so that sunlight, especially from southern exposures, can penetrate more deeply into buildings. Where possible, relocate and resize windows and install lightwells in order to bring in more sunlight. Keep in mind, however, that local historic preservation offices often need to approve new schematics.

• Also, in gut rehabilitations, take the opportunity to install new, high-efficiency heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment.

Do the same for lighting.

100

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Retrofitting The third way to get more out of existing buildings is to retrofit them with resource-efficient equipment such as low-flow showerheads and high-efficiency furnaces. Just as the opportunities for reducing resource use and cutting utility bills are generally smaller in rehabilitation projects than in ground-up redevelopments, so are they even smaller in retrofits. On the other hand, retrofits effectively salvage more of an existing building, potentially extending its useful life by making it more cost-effective to operate.

Since the scope for design decisions is narrower for retrofitting than for redevelopment and rehabilitation (mostly concerning with with what kind of equipment to install), the main planning issues in retrofitting projects relate to financing. One potential source of funding is government. In Illinois, for example, a state agency provides grants to affordable housing developers to retrofit homes once abandoned as too expensive to heat. (See “Illinois Energy Efficient Affordable Housing Program” Case Example in this chapter.)

Another approach is to use an energy performance contract, under which a building owner agrees to have an energy service company (ESCO) retrofit a building to improve its energy efficiency.

In return, the ESCO gets a share of the utility bill savings over a set number of years. It is the ESCO’s responsibility to estimate the potential savings, arrange financing for new equipment, and install it. The building owner need make no capital outlay.

A major barrier to energy performance contracting has been that many lenders lack the technical expertise to determine whether the ESCO’s share of the savings will suffice to retire any debt it takes on to finance the energy efficiency investments. Fortunately, lenders’ ability to make such estimates generally rises with experience. (See “Financing Energy Efficiency Investments” section in Chapter 1.)

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

101

Case Study: Illinois Energy Efficient Affordable Housing Program, Illinois.

Themes:

Land and building reuse; energy and resource efficiency.

Techniques: Benefits:

Funding upgrades for energy and resource efficiency.

Lower development costs; lower utility bills; natural resource

conservation.

The Illinois Energy Efficient Affordable Housing Program (IEEAHP) provides grants to non-profit housing developers grants for retrofitting abandoned buildings into energy-efficient, affordable housing.

To date, 800 units once abandoned as too expensive to heat have been rehabbed and reoccupied.

The program is now also focusing on funding energy efficiency investments in new, infill affordable housing. As of 1997, it had funded energy upgrades for 200 new single-family homes. The program has also financed innovative resource efficiency measures in a rehab of an inner-city two-unit building.

Under the IEEAHP, the redevelopment process begins when neighborhood non-profits identify abandoned buildings for redevelopment and secure funding from other sources for most of the construction. For extra funding for energy efficiency investments, the developers can then apply to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, which will grant up to $1,500 per unit for new construction and $2,000 per unit for rehabilitations.

Energy efficiency measures used have included installation of extra insulation and insulating windows; sealing of air leaks; and installation of ventilation and high-efficiency heating systems.

IEEAHP projects have not used passive solar heating because most of the building sites are surrounded by other buildings that preclude much solar gain. Residents’ heating bills in rehabbed units have typically ranged from $200 to $250 per heating season, half the area’s average.

Sources: Paul Knight, Architect, Domus/PLUS, Oak Park, IL, discussion with author, April 7, 1997; Maureen Davlin, Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, Springfield, IL, discussion with author, April 8, 1997.

102

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Case Study: Massachusetts Finance Agency, Boston, Massachusetts.

Themes:

Innovative financing; energy efficiency.

Technique:

Performance contracting with government agency

providing financing.

Benefits:

Lower utility bills; resource conservation.

The Massachusetts Finance Agency (MFA) has provided financing to a Boston-based energy service company making energy efficiency investments in more than 20 assisted housing properties under performance contracts. For each property, MFA offers owners and property managers 10-year loans of up to $450,000 as first mortgage extensions. The energy service company, Citizens Conservation Corporation, receives a share of the savings on energy and water bills, as well as on equipment maintenance and replacement costs.

It is using this revenue to repay the MFA loans, cover its other costs, and turn a profit.

Source: Janice DeBarrios and Sandra Nolden, Energy Efficiency in Publicly Assisted Housing: Barriers and Recommendations (Boston: Citizens Conservation Corporation, 1994), pp. 8–9.

End Notes 1. George Brewster, with Marianna Lauschel and Michael Pawlukiewicz, “The Ecology of Development: Integrating the Built and Natural Environments,” Working Paper 649 (Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute, 1996), p 81.

2. Perry Bigelow, President, Bigelow Homes, Palatine, IL, letter to author, August 17, 1997.

3. Ibid.

4. Janice DeBarrios and Sandra Nolden, Energy Efficiency in Publicly Assisted Housing: Barriers and Recommendations (Boston: Citizens Conservation Corporation, 1994).

Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Retrofitting: Recycling Land and Buildings

103

Chapter 7

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient Introduction How Green Design Cuts O&M Costs How O&M Can Make Green Design Work Better Educating and Involving Residents Training and Performance Incentives for O&M Staff Custodial and Housekeeping Practices Performance Contracting Maintaining Security HVAC Maintenance Landscaping Maintenance

Introduction There is a two-way relationship between green design and operations and maintenance (O&M). On the one hand, energy and resourceefficient design can reduce the need for O&M spending over the life of a development. On the other, O&M is essential to ensuring that many energy and resource-efficient design elements work as envisioned. It is important for project design teams to consider O&M issues during the design phase. It is equally important for O&M management and staff to think about green issues long after the development’s designers have moved on to other projects.

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

107

How Green Design Cuts O&M Costs Many green design strategies reduce long-term operations and maintenance costs. (See Figure 1.) Natural ventilation, for example, can reduce the build-up of mold and moisture, reducing cleaning needs and the chance of building damage. Ceramic tile, wood, cork, and other environmentally friendly alternatives to carpet generate fewer chemicals, require less cleaning and last longer, cutting operating costs. Landscaping with native plants may reduce the need for watering and pest control.

108

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

How O&M Can Make Green Design Work Better A development’s O&M department is the ongoing link between residents, building management, and the buildings themselves. The department is responsible for security, climate control system maintenance, cleaning, and landscaping. How it manages its responsibilities will affect the safety and health of residents and the financial and environmental performance of the development. Inattention to heating system O&M, for example, can lead to massive waste of natural and financial resources. O&M is an important factor in making and keeping buildings green, and will be the focus of the rest of this chapter.

All developments degrade in performance over time unless properly cared for. It is all too common, for instance, for utility costs to increase significantly in the year following installation of a new climate control system. The culprit is usually improper maintenance.

Management can prevent such problems by adopting a philosophy of continual improvement, educating residents and staff about building functions on an ongoing basis and soliciting their feedback.

Regular, well-documented testing of energy-using systems is particularly important in order to prevent costly breakdowns, inefficiency, and indoor air quality problems.

In developing a management plan for O&M, areas to focus on include educating residents and involving them in management, training O&M staff and giving them performance incentives, and using environmentally sound cleaning practices and products.

Educating and Involving Residents Often residents of affordable housing developments have little incentive to conserve resources—especially when they do not have to pay their utility bills. As a result, the path of least resistance often leads them away from resource efficiency. In response to the chill they feel on the coldest winter days, for example, residents might push thermostat override buttons. When the weather warms up, the override

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

109

might stay on, keeping the heat on full-blast. To get rid of the heat, residents might then open windows and doors. Informing residents about the proper use of equipment such as thermostats and kitchen and bathroom ventilation fans is thus an essential first step in preventing wasteful decisions.

More generally, O&M staff and management should ensure that new residents are trained in areas that relate to a development’s environmental and economic performance. Some guidelines: No-Cost/Low-Cost Resident Education Measures

• During droughts and water shortges, remind residents about the need to conserve water.

• Educate residents about green housekeeping practices, such as using low-toxicity detergents, providing ventilation when cleaning, and informing O&M staff if they spot mold, moisture, or pest problems.

• Explain the environmental and safety hazards of pouring toxic chemicals such as cleaners and paints down drains.

• Teach residents composting procedures (see “Landscaping Maintenance” section below) and recycling procedures. Make clear that residents should rinse food containers before putting them in recycling chutes or bins, so as not to attract rodents and other pests, and that recycling bins or chutes should not be used to dispose of household garbage, hazardous materials, or containers contaminated with hazardous materials.

• Make informational videos available to residents in their native languages. These can provide instruction on how to use climate control equipment, appliances, parking garage access systems, security systems, and other equipment. The videos can also provide information about daycare facilities, playgrounds, recycling rules, compost bins, and gardens. New residents should watch such videos with a management representative present so that they can ask questions during and after the showing. A live demonstration and tour of the facilities and grounds can follow. (See “Caritas Management” Case Study in this Chapter.

• Give all residents copies of service and warranty manuals for their homes.

• Since residents influence energy use in their buildings, it makes sense not only to educate them but also to involve them more in management of the premises. Getting residents involved can make them feel more invested in the operation of the building, and more responsible to the development and community in which they live.

From management’s point of view, involving residents in building

110

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

O&M can pay off by reducing the number maintenance calls and cutting energy and water waste.

• One effective technique is to have old residents instruct new residents. Residents generally respond better to instruction from other residents than from employees of the management company.

Language and cultural barriers are less likely to get in the way of communication. The proximity and availability of neighbors also position them better for answering simple maintenance questions and detecting small problems before they become big ones.

Training and Performance Incentives for O&M Staff For O&M staff, as for residents, the path of least resistance often leads to resource waste. Maintenance staff have been known, for example, to set thermostats in residents’ units on permanent override so that residents will stop complaining to them about the lack of heat.

Management that gives O&M staff incentives for improving the performance of the developments they work in can head off such problems. First, management can hire residents as O&M staff. In general, O&M staff need to develop a familiar and comfortable relationship with residents, who form the biggest “living variable” in any development. Without an understanding of people’s day-to-day needs, no amount of technical knowledge and care will make affordable housing as successful as it can be. When O&M workers live in a development, this relationship will be much stronger.

Proper training for O&M staff is also essential, both because it puts knowledge into the minds of those who must use it and because it can make staff feel they have a stake in the environmental and financial performance of a development. When staff members feel entrusted with day-to-day responsibilities, they may take more personal responsibility for a development’s operation.

Management can also motivate O&M staff by giving them feedback on their building performance. Suggestions for providing feedback: No-Cost/Low-Cost O&M Staff Feedback Measures

• Compare rates of energy and water use among different buildings in a development. Provide an energy subtotal for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment. Post results for all maintenance personnel to see. Consider offering awards for the best year-end utility results, and even pay bonuses. If one building performs better than most others do, that can be a source of professional pride for O&M staff.

• For buildings or units that lag behind, on the other hand, discuss with the O&M staff what steps to take to improve performance.

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

111

Case Study: Caritas Management, San Francisco.

Themes:

Improving community relations; protecting indoor air quality.

Techniques:

Involving residents in management; using environmentally

friendly cleaning products.

Benefits:

Energy and maintenance costs potentially reduced; improved

resident and employee health; reduced resident turnover.

Caritas Management Corporation is a wholly owned, for-profit subsidiary of Mission Development Housing Corporation (MDHC), which is a major non-profit housing developer in the San Francisco Bay area. Caritas provides an example of affordable housing management that involves residents extensively.

Eighteen of Caritas’s 46 employees are tenants in Caritas-managed developments. They work as desk clerks, resident managers, tenant advocates, and training coordinators. Most staff members are minorities, reflecting the populations in the buildings in which they live and work. Caritas has helped facilitate the organization of tenant advocacy groups at 17 of the 39 low-income developments it manages.

Resident managers train tenants in safety, energy efficiency, and other operations issues. They explain lease and house rules to new residents, after which residents must initial statements to testify that they are fully informed about the rules. New tenants are also shown a video, available in Spanish and English, that explains what is expected of them and shows how to operate features of their unit and the development. For reinforcement, resident managers then demonstrate how to use appliances and climate controls.

Caritas now manages 1,500 affordable housing units for nonprofit groups. With an annual budget of $1 million, Caritas has essentially operated on a break-even basis. Any profit earned goes to its parent organization, MDHC. Management fees generally range from $38 to $50 per unit per month, but lower rates are charged for older buildings that cannot cover standard fees without raising rents.

MHDC has encountered community opposition to some of its plans for construction of new low-income housing. This has placed pressure on Caritas to improve community relations in existing MHDC developments. A community relations staff, formerly the security staff, is now trained in conflict resolution and negotiation skills—which are useful in handling situations involving drug-related

112

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Affordable housing and community space for seniors Caritas Management, San Francisco, California Photo by Mark Snyder

or domestic violence. Management has also joined with tenants, local police, and other neighborhood residents to form a community crime watch group.

Caritas has trained its staff in green maintenance and landscaping practices. And it has established recycling programs on all of its properties. It passes earnings from selling recyclables back to the developments’ tenant organizations. One barrier to a cooperative relationship, however, is that maintenance staff unionized in 1993 and have prevented Caritas from involving residents in maintenance work. Nevertheless, low delinquency and turnover rates in Caritas buildings testify to the overall success of its management.

Sources: Raul Escareol and Manny Cruz, Caritas Management, San Francisco, discussions with author, March and April 1997; “Program Profile: Caritas Management Corp,” program literature, Caritas Management, San Francisco, 1995, p. 2.

Custodial and Housekeeping Practices The green approach to housekeeping and custodial practices focuses not only on cleanliness, but on the health of residents and O&M staff. In so doing, it reduces management’s liability risks from poorly cleaned air handling systems, cleaning products that lack material safety data sheets (MSDSs), and other maintenance-related hazards.

Virtually all cleaning products used in affordable housing can pose health hazards to residents and maintenance staff. Products that contain toxic or harmful ingredients include furniture and floor polishes; oven cleaners; drain cleaners; mold and mildew cleaners; disinfectants; rug, carpet, and upholstery shampoos; glass cleaners; chlorinated scouring powders; and household pesticides.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Housekeeping Measures

• Stock the least-toxic cleaning products available. Commonly available non-toxic cleaners include baking soda, salt, distilled white vinegar, lemon juice, trisodium phosphate (though this can cause water pollution); detergents and solvents made from cornstarch, coconut oil, or orange peels; and commercial water-based products.

• Train management staff and residents in the use of cleaning products.

Schedule meetings with suppliers and staff to update staff on new products and procedures.

• Make sure that all cleaning products purchased come with Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), which list ingredients and provide contact and emergency response information. Products bought off-the-shelf from supermarkets and discount stores typically lack MSDSs. Accidents with products lacking MSDS can expose management to lawsuits and fines.

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

113

• Purchase cleaning products from a small number of suppliers, preferably one or two. The more suppliers used, the more difficult it will be to obtain missing product information or contact the manufacturer in case of emergency.

• In order to discourage residents from using toxic cleaning products, purchase low- or zero-toxicity ones in bulk and then sell or give them to residents.

• Develop accident response procedures for toxic substance spills.

• Buy cleaning products that come in recycled and reusable containers.

Consider buying super-concentrated formulations which require less packaging and transportation energy use for a given amount of detergent. Such products need to be carefully mixed to avoid ineffective or dangerous concentrations.

Garages, loading docks, and machine shop areas are places of potential danger from fuels, oils, solvents, vehicle exhaust, and other substances. Guidelines for reducing hazards in these areas include: No-Cost/Low-Cost High-Risk Area Housekeeping Measures

• Ensure good mechanical ventilation, perhaps supplemented with natural ventilation.

• Promptly clean up spills of fuel, oil, and anti-freeze. This will protect air quality and prevent the chemicals from being tracked into residential areas.

Basements and crawl spaces are also sources of hazards such as dust, insects, and toxic insulation and building materials. Guidelines for reducing these hazards: No-Cost/Low-Cost Basement and Crawl Space Housekeeping Measures

• Inspect and clean basements and crawl spaces regularly.

• In humid regions, use dehumidifiers during summer to reduce mold growth. (They should be used judiciously since they are major energy users.)

• Provide mechanical ventilation and supplement with natural ventilation whenever possible.

• Schedule regular inspections for pests such as rodents and termites.

114

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Performance Contracting An important milestone in affordable housing energy efficiency occurred in September 1991, when HUD changed its regulations to allow local housing authorities to engage in energy performance contracts. (See “Retrofitting” section in Chapter 6 for an explanation of performance contracting.)

But despite the new rules, regulatory impediments to energy efficiency investment in federally influenced housing remain. One barrier is that building owners and managers must obtain regulatory approval before making debt-financed investments. The application and approval process can be lengthy and burdensome, requiring local, state, and federal review. Expediting the process through a central agency would encourage more building owners and managers to take advantage of energy efficiency improvements.

Another limitation is that federal money may currently only be used for performance contracting in public housing units that are master-metered, not individually metered. (See “Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems” section in Chapter 4 for a discussion of this distinction.) A pilot program to provide energy service contracting in the Oakland Housing Authority, however, includes individually metered resident units. If the pilot project succeeds and leads HUD to allow performance contracting in individually metered units nationwide, it will open major new opportunities for energy efficiency investment in affordable housing. (See Oakland Housing Authority Case Example in this chapter.)

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

115

Case Study: Oakland Housing Authority, Oakland, California.

Theme:

Energy efficiency in federally assisted housing; addressing

individually and master metered residences Technique: Benefits:

Performance contracting.

Energy saved; lower utility bills.

In 1997, the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) launched a pilot program to employ energy performance contracting services for both individually-metered and master-metered units at its 267 housing sites. This will be the first time performance contracting has been tried in individually-metered, federally supported housing, and has been made possible by a special rule exemption granted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is projected to cut this development’s utility bills, which currently total $4.35 million per year, by $325,000–665,000, double the savings that would be expected if only master-metered units were covered.

Performance contracting in individually-metered public housing is difficult because many residents are given allowances to cover their utility bills, based on their development’s average per-unit energy use at some time in the past. High allowances can encourage residents to, say, turn up the heat so much that it undermines the good done by energy efficiency investments. As a result, OHA will be recomputing the allowance amounts each year—more frequently than it used to. The drop in total allowances paid will represent the total energy bill savings. Over the first ten years, OHA and the performance contractors will split this money evenly, OHA using its share to make other investments in its housing complexes. After that, all savings will revert to the federal government.

Source: Lee Ann Farner, Management Analyst, Oakland Housing Authority, Oakland, CA, discussion with author, May 1997.

Maintaining Security

116

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Urban areas may present affordable housing with serious security problems. Techniques for preventing crime in developments follow.

For guidelines on designing secure developments, see Chapter 3.

No-Cost/Low-Cost Security Maintenance Measures

• Keep abreast of gang activities in the area. Graffiti is one indicator some affordable housing managers monitor. Eradicate graffiti as quickly as possible.

• Maintain landscaping for security. Make sure, for example, that vegetation does not grow to block visibility in open spaces.

(See Chapter 3 and “Landscaping Maintenance” section below.)

• For developments with secure access gates, make sure intercoms and locks are always in working order. A breakdown in security for just one day might allow a non-resident to enter, convince true residents that he is also a resident, and later persuade the true residents to “buzz” him in.

Other Security Maintenance Measures

• Train staff members in conflict resolution. To further build relations with the local community hire tenants, reformed gang members, or others with neighborhood knowledge and connections.

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

117

HVAC Maintenance Securing long-term savings from new, energy-efficient equipment requires proper maintenance. Maintenance staff who provide routine maintainance checks and can respond quickly to problems are particularly valuable.

Especially for complex systems, it is essential to permanently locate equipment documentation in accessible places. Maintenance staff turnover is often quite high, and knowledge and procedures not recorded in a standard place can be lost forever. Documentation is also essential for managing routine maintenance and monitoring HVAC problems and complaints.

No-Cost/Low-Cost HVAC Maintenance Measures

• Regularly perform HVAC testing and maintenance and duct and filter cleaning. Investigate indoor air quality complaints thoroughly.

Call in an air quality testing and troubleshooting firm when necessary.

• Consider keeping all documentation—system requirements, maintenance schedules, MSDSs, incident reports—on a centralized computer system and giving access to all management staff. To prevent recurring problems and to limit liability risks, keep on-line records of system testing, cleaning, and indoor air quality complaints as thorough and up-to-date as possible.

• Make sure HVAC components are not exposed to water leaks or standing water, particularly in basements and attics. Biocontaminants can grow in such places and then spread through the building via HVAC ducts.

• Pay particular attention to HVAC system operation and indoor air quality during remodeling, construction, and repainting—activities that generate significant amounts of indoor air pollution. If possible, isolate the part of the HVAC system serving such areas from the rest of the system.

118

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Landscaping Maintenance As with HVAC systems, what determines the environmental and health effects of a development’s landscaping are both its initial design and how it is maintained. One area where green O&M practices are particularly important is pest management. When pests are a problem, instead of relying on conventional pesticide-heavy attacks, O&M staff can opt for the increasingly common approach known as integrated pest management, which seeks to reduce the need for pesticides through comprehensive planning, planting, and natural pest control strategies. Rodent and pest control, for instance, should begin with the simple steps of banning food disposal and wood storage practices that can create inviting habitat for pests.

Other landscaping maintenance steps include: No-Cost/Low-Cost Landscaping Maintenance Measures

• Install automatic drip irrigation systems, which reduce maintenance and water requirements while nurturing healthier root growth.

• For trees that are surrounded by pavement, install deep root-watering tubes and root barriers, which focus root growth downward, away from paved surfaces.

• Clip “suckers,” new shoots that emerge from the ground near the bases of tree trunks. Suckers reduce crown growth of the larger trees and can block eye-level visibility in open areas, reducing security.

• Remove dead or diseased branches from plants and trees.

These branches slow new, healthy growth and are unsightly.

Operations and Maintenance: Keeping Affordable Housing Energy and Resource Efficient

119

Developments with gardens and composting areas have special maintenance needs. Suggestions related to composting: No-Cost/Low-Cost Composting Maintenance Measures

• Place compost piles in shady locations, in order to speed bacterial decay. If this is not possible, then it may be necessary to regularly and lightly water compost piles to keep them moist.

• Turn compost piles over regularly in order to expose all of the material to air and accelerate decay.

• Place screens over bin openings to keep out cats and rodents.

Check the screens regularly for holes.

Endnotes 1. Janice DeBarrios and Sandra Nolden, Energy Efficiency in Publicly Assisted Housing: Barriers and Recommendations. (Boston: Citizens Conservation Corporation, 1994), p. 5

120

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Chapter 8

Policy and Partnerships Introduction Non-Profits or Community-Based Organizations Building Industry Associations or Home Builder Associations Local Government or Utility Sustainable Building Program National Organizations

Introduction The benefits that developers can draw from green design are numerous. They include: reduced costs, increased community support for a project, and access to resources such as technical assistance that otherwise might not be available. Additional benefits might come through advantages in the permitting process and marketing assistance to help sell the product.

Partnerships with organizations which are interested in the benefits of green design offer developers the ability to integrate green design into an affordable housing development with relative ease. This chapter will describe four types of partners which can help developers accomplish their green design goals: a) non-profit or community-based organizations (CBOs); b) Building Industry Associations (BIAs)/Home Builder Associations (HBAs); c) local government/municipal utilities; and d) national organizations.

This chapter provides illustrations of successful partnerships that benefit developers as well as suggested steps that governments can take to encourage partnerships through public policy. It would behoove developers to lobby their local legislators and government agencies to take these steps.

Policy and Partnerships

123

Non-Profits or Community Based Organizations (CBOs) Partnership benefits

• Access to government or private grantmaking resources • Greater likelihood of community acceptance of the project • Access to technical expertise Examples

• Southface Energy Institute and Habitat for Humanity (HFH) Southface Energy Institute is a non-profit organization that offers technical training in resource and energy efficiency. The Southface/HFH partnership dates back over 10 years to the first passive solar home built during the Jimmy Carter Work Project. Southface has provided a variety of services, including development of a homeowners manual on maintenance with a strong focus on energy, training for homeowners on propermaintenance, hands-on training at various work sites (mostly blitz builds), and review of energy costs and proposed cost saving measures for HFH. Most weekend it is possible to find a Southfacer or two volunteering at an HFH site doing construction or remodeling.

Currently, Southface is providing direct technical assistance, which includes writing factsheets, consulting on design and construction issues, in-field demonstrations and performance testing. They also provide training for the Green Team program (about 400 affiliates have joined) in addition to speaking and training Habitat members at HFH programs.

Website: http://www.southface.org

• Greenbelt Alliance and San Francisco Bay Area developers Greenbelt Alliance is an environmental non-profit dedicated to protecting the San Francisco Bay Area's Greenbelt of open space and to making Bay Area communities better places to live. Through their Compact Development Endorsement Program, Greenbelt Alliance endorses and supports infill housing and mixed-use developments, especially if they

124

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

are transit oriented and/or affordable. Proposals are reviewed by the Compact Development Endorsement Team (CDT) according to a set of Greenbelt Alliance endorsement criteria. If projects meet CDT approval, they are then presented to the Greenbelt Alliance Board for final review and approval. After a project has gone through the approval process, Greenbelt Alliance will provide a letter of endorsement and speak in support of the project at public hearings.

Website: http://www.greenbelt.org/

• Conservation Consultants International, Inc. (CCI) and regional developers/community CCI is a regional non-profit based in Pittsburgh, PA that specializes in energy efficiency, environmental education and sustainable urban redevelopment. CCI’s "Green Neighborhood Initiative" (GNI) targets schools, housing, businesses and religious organizations in an effort to boost the economy, reduce community impacts on the environment and improve the overall physical appearance of localities. The GNI offers free energy surveys to help lower utility bills, and provides free insulation, weatherstripping and energy efficient materials through utility-run weatherization programs. In addition, CCI works with schools to address issues such as indoor air quality, natural day-lighting levels, environmental awareness and grounds

Policy and Partnerships

125

Building Industry Associations (BIAs) or Home Builder Associations (HBAs) Partnership benefits

• Excellent marketing advantages/resources • Strong network of other builder/developers who together can help create demand for "green" or healthy building products • Access to local network of municipal government agencies and municipal or private utilities, many of which offer resources and technical expertise Examples

• Metro Denver HBA “Built Green” Program, developers, and consumers The Built Green program, which began in 1995, is a voluntary program open to builders and remodelers. The program whose main audience is homeowners and homebuilders requires builders to include a minimum number of options from various categories that are listed in the BuildGreen checklist. The system is flexible to allow builders to participate to the degree possible. The program provides a marketing edge to participating builders by offering ongoing public relations, education and marketing to homebuyers of “green” homes. It also rates product manufacturers and brings them to attention of participating builders. In addition, the program’s partnership with the state Office of Energy Conservation has provided funds for education and outreach.

Website: www.hbadenver.com

• Suburban Maryland BIA “Building Green” Program and builders/developers The Building Green Program is unique in that it targets both builders and land developers to address green building issues. The program, sponsored by the SMBIA, addresses issues that include water usage, indoor air quality, and energy efficiency. The “Building Green” program certifies builders and developers by requiring compliance with local building codes, membership dues, an environmental survey, and continuing education in environmental issues. Builders and developers receive marketing assistance for their participation.

Website: www.smbia.org

126

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Local Government or Utility Sustainable Building Programs Partnership benefits

• Access to technical assistance, information and/or material resources • Excellent marketing advantages A variety of sustainable building programs exist across the country that offer incentives for builders and developers who incorporate resource-efficient building practices. Many are initiated by local homebuilder associations (see above), but a handful are run by cities or muncipalities, some with utilities as partners.

Examples

• City of Austin Green Building Program The Austin Green Building program began in 1992 and is based in the city’s Planning, Environmental and Conservation Services Dept. Primary funding for the program comes from Austin Energy, the city’s electric utility, and support is also derived from city’s water and drainage utilities.

The program features a rating system that grades builders on a five star scale. The focus of the rating system is on five issues: water, energy, materials, health and safety, and community. The program includes technical and marketing assistance to homebuilders and provides education to consumers.

Website: www.ci.austin.tx.us/greenbuilder

• Los Angeles Sustainable Building Program This program, initiated by a partnership between Global Green USA and the City of Los Angeles’ Environmental Affairs Departments offers tools, education and marketing assistance to developers to encourage resourceefficient building practices in affordable housing. Tools include a checklist for rehab developments that includes cost comparisons of various green building materials, a guidebook that outlines green building practices, and a sourcebook that leads developers directly to product manufacturers and distributors of green building products.

Policy and Partnerships

127

Steps that local governments can take to initiate green/sustainable building programs

• Establishing systems to rate the energy efficiency, resource efficiency, and community impacts of planned developments. Rating systems help developers prioritize the many environmental and community impacts they need to consider. They also allow the developers to compare their projects to conventional developments.

• Recognizing green developers with awards and publicity. Portland, Oregon, for instance, honors green developers through its BEST awards program. Awards help developers market new projects.

• Appointing an Ombudsman to help developers cut through bureaucratic barriers to green development.

• Reducing permitting fees for green developments.

• Expediting permit approvals for green developments. Agencies can use a point system to rate a development’s "greenness" and then accelerate the approval in proportion to its rating (see City of Austin Green Building Program).

• Appointing affordable housing providers to sustainable building task forces or other relevant advisory boards. (If no such bodies exist in a particular area, developers can work with other professionals to have them created.)

• Offering development incentives to affordable housing developers like those offered by the City of Los Angeles Housing Incentive Ordinance.

The city ordinance awards density bonuses and also rewards developers with less stringent parking space requirements and expedited plan checks. In addition, rewards could be offered for projects located near public transit stops. These incentives increase the amount of available affordable housing and inherently result in more sustainable development practices.

Steps that utilities (either municipal or those overseen by the state) can take to encourage green building practices

• Administering demand-side management (DSM) programs, under which utilities help cover the costs of energy- and water-efficiency investments, which are often cheaper than generating new sources of power. In the case of private utilities, these programs are enacted under the oversight of state public utility commissions. One simple form of DSM is for utilities to charge lower connection fees to developments which reduce their need for utility services, for example by xeriscaping, using on-site

128

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

stormwater management, laying less pavement than normal, or using alternative energy sources. Portland, Oregon has been encouraging affordable housing developers to participate in the city-owned power company’s Earth Smart program. This program rates homes on the basis of resource and energy efficiency and, until recently, gave $500 rebates on units making a certain grade.

• Supporting public benefit programs that fund energy and resource efficiency improvements and technologies such as low-flush toilets, energyefficient applicance buy-downs and partnerships between affordable housing developers and non-profits which promote green building. An example is the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power public benefit program that is mandated by state law.

Additional incentives that can be used to encourage greening affordable housing

• Waiving code requirements that impede green development, such as rules that require wide streets or limit development density.

• Granting tax credits and subsidies for higher-density development.

• Providing developers with technical support and grants for reducing construction waste. Agencies in Portland, Oregon and Alameda County, California run such programs.

• Sponsoring collaborative design and planning processes that bring developers together with community groups, environmental groups, and other stakeholders. Such groups may offer developers free research time and may be willing to testify on behalf of a development before legislative and planning bodies.

• Giving green developers preference in city contracts. The Seattle Department of Housing and Human Service’s 1997 request for proposals for affordable-housing related projects, for instance, encourages applicants to plan for recycling of construction and demolition materials. The San Francisco Redevelopment Agency plans a similar approach.

• Linking affordable housing development with broader economic development programs, aimed, for example, at brownfield redevelopment, military base reuse, or mixed-use development. San Luis Obispo, California, has arranged with a developer to build an affordable housing complex on a brownfield site. For developers, participation in such programs can yield early leads on property, whose development will be supported by government grants or low-interest loans.

Policy and Partnerships

129

National Organizations Partnership benefits

• Access to research and technology that is tested and proven • Ability to address multi-regional concerns • Possible access to international markets Examples

• National Association of Homebuilders Research Center The NAHB Research Center is developing a model program for home builder associations to use to create their own green builder programs.

Development of the model includes the following steps:

Evaluating existing programs—The six existing HBA endorsed or sponsored programs are different. There are also programs that have been developed by municipalities and utilities. An analysis of all these programs is useful in identifying key elements, key content areas, and the implications of how programs are structured.

Developing a model—A green builder model is a guide for builders and HBA staff to use as they create a program. Items will include suggested time lines, partner selection, program structures, content areas, and marketing opportunities.

Testing the model—The Research Center will work with one HBA and the model to develop a local program. The model will be refined based on the experience with the selected HBA. Disseminating results—The model will be made available to HBAs across the country for their use in starting green builder programs.

The NAHB Research Center will be working with the Greater Atlanta Home Builders Association testing the model over the upcoming year.

The Greater Atlanta HBA program and the model will be released at the 1999 NAHB International Builders Show in Dallas, Texas.1 Website: www.nahbrc.org

130

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

• Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH) The Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH) is a public/private sector initiative which seeks to expand the development and utilization of new technologies in order to make American homes stronger, safer and more durable; more energy efficient and environmentally friendly; easier to maintain and less costly to operate; and more comfortable and exciting to live in.

On the federal level, PATH is an interagency effort that includes the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, and Labor; the Environmental Protection Agency; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and the National Science Foundation. PATH’s federal agency partners are committed to working with the Partnership to help coordinate advanced housing technology efforts throughout the federal government.

As the Secretariat, HUD is responsible for the administration of PATH on a day to day basis. Leadership of the overall federal policy direction for the program is jointly provided by HUD and the Department of Energy.2 Website: http://www.pathnet.org

• Million Solar Roofs Initiative On June 26, 1997, President Clinton announced the Million Solar Roofs Initiative. The goal of this program is to install one million solar energy systems (photovoltaic & thermal) on buildings across the United States by the year 2010. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is supporting teams from the building industry, local governments, state agencies, the solar industry, electric utilities, and other organizations to remove market barriers, foster incentives, and strengthen the grassroots demand for solar energy technologies.3 Website: http://www.eren.doe.gov/millionroofs/

• U.S. Department of Energy The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs (BTS) offers numerous programs, either directly or through grant or incentive programs, to assist developers in incorporating energy and resource efficiency. BTS provides several partnership opportunities for builders and developers to join in the energy and cost savings available through energy efficiency. The Building America program has created a consortia of large builders of new housing. Associated with this program is the Industrialized Housing project which conducts research and demonstrates approaches to energy

Policy and Partnerships

131

efficient, healthy homes. The Rebuild America effort has organized partnerships with public housing authorities and developers of large multifamily rehabbers. The Exemplary Buildings program is integrating passive solar technology with energy efficient building design. And the Partnership for Affordable Housing is working with local communities and neighborhood organizations to bring energy conservation concepts to community-based efforts.4 Website: http://www.eren.doe.gov/buildings/residential)

Endnotes 1. National Association of Home Builders Research Center Page, August 1998, < www.nahbrc.org> 2. Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing Page, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, August 1998, <http://www.pathnet.org> 3. Million Solar Roofs Page, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Network (EREN), U.S. Department of Energy, August 1998, < http://www.eren.doe.gov/millionroofs> 4. Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs Page, U.S. Department of Energy, September 1998, < http://www.eren.doe.gov/buildings/residential>

132

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

Appendix A. Green Building and Sustainable Communities Resources B. Acknowledgements C. GG USA Background Information

Appendix A â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Resources Below is a list of information on green building and sustainable communities. The resources identified below are just a sampling of the wealth of information available today to design, construct and maintain green affordable housing. For a comprehensive list of resources, please see Environmental Building News (EBN) 1997 Supplement to Volume 6, which is a detailed listing of over 150 of the best books and periodicals on green building and related topics and a listing of Internet resources.

(Many of the resources listed below are excerpted from EBNâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 1997 Supplement to Volume 6)

Green Development: Integrating

Environmental Building News Editor: Alex Wilson Environmental Building News 122 Birge Street, Suite 30 Brattleboro, VT 05301 phone 800.861.0954 fax 802.257.7304 http://www.aceee.org A monthly newsletter featuring news, reviews, and feature articles on all aspects of environmentally sustainable design and construction.

EBN Product Catalog 1739 Snowmass Creek Road Snowmass, CO 81654 phone 970.927.3851 fax 970.927.3420 A comprehensive catalog of enviromental product literature and references for 1200 building products.

Ecology and Real Estate

by Rocky Mountain Insitute, Alex Wilson, published by John Wiley & Sons Rocky Mountain Institute 1739 Snowmass Creek Road Snowmass, CO 81654-9199 970.927.3851 fax (970) 927-4178 general@rmi.org http://www.rmi.org Covers all aspects of ecologically sensitive development, with real-world examples based on 80 case studies.

Healthy By Design: Building & Remodeling Solutions for Creating Healthy Homes

by David Rousseau, James Wasley Hartely & Mark Publishers 1547 Dorwf Road Point Roberts, WA 98281 800.277.5887 fax (604) 738-1913 hartmark@direct.ca

Green Building and Sustainable Communities Resources

135

Features a discussion of indoor pollutants and their sources, case studies of healthy and energy efficient homes, and construction details conducive to healthier homes.

Performance specification guidelines on environmental and healthy building materials. It is organized by Construction Specification Instituteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (CSI) Divisions 1-16.

Recyclying Resource Catalog Integrated Solid Waste Management Offices City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works 433 Spring Street, 5th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90013 213.473.8228 fax 213.473.8232 e-mail: ISWM@san.ci.la.ca.us http:www.ci.la.ca.us

Sustainable Building Technical Manual Produced by the U.S. Green Building Council, Public Technology Inc. (PTI), and the U.S. Department of Energy, 1996.

U.S Green Building Council 110 Sutter Street, Suite 410 San Francisco, CA 94104 415.445.9500 fax 415.445.9911 info@usgbc.org http://www.usgbc.org

A recycling tool kit for Architects, construction specifiers and contractors, governmental agencies and others interested in recycling and buying recycled-content products.

Reducing Home Building Costs with OVE Design and Construction NAHB Research Center, Inc. 400 Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Blvd., Upper Marlboro, MD, 20772-8731 301.249.4000 fax 301.547-2604 lbowles@nahbrc.org http://www.nahbrc.org A book on how to design and build housing using optimum value engineering, which reduces material quantities used while increasing ease of construction.

ReSourceful Specifications: Guideline Specifications for Environmentally Considered Building Materials & Construction Methods, Larry Strain, AIA, Siegel & Strain Architects, 1996.

Siegel & Strain Architects 1295 59th Street Emeryville, CA 94608 510.547.8092 fax 510.547-2604 info@siegelstrain.com

136

A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing

This practice-oriented manual provides discussion on green building including: significance and environmental impacts of buildings, economics, programming and pre-design, site and building design, construction process, building management and operations & maintenance, and future trends.

WasteSpec: Model Specifications for Construction Waste Reduction, Reuse, and Recycling

by Triangle J Council of Governments P.O. Box 12276 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 919.549.0551 fax 919.549.9390 tjcog@mindspring.com http://www.tjcog.dst.nc.us/tjcog/ Provides model language to insert in specifications on waste reduction techniques during construction, reuse of construction materials on site, and salvage and recycling of construction and demolition waste material.

ACEEE Publications The following list of publications are useful tools for developers who are interested in energy efficiency. They are available from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) at: 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 801 Washington, DC 20036 202.429.0063 fax:202.429.0193 ace3pubs@ix.netcom.com http://aceee.org

Consumer Guide to Home Energy Savings

by Alex Wilson and John Morrill Updated periodically with model numbers of the most efficient appliances (heating, kitchen, laundry, air conditioning). Information on selecting energyefficient equipment and improving the performance and efficiency of older equipment.

Exemplary Home Builderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s field Guide, 1994

By Joseph Lstiburek, Building Science Corporation The definite handbook for building safe, healthy, comfortable, durable, and energy-efficient houses. Organized for easy access and illustrated with 140 detailed construction drawings, it provides guidance and instruction on every phase of homebuilding from site planning to materials selection.

Improving Energy Efficiency in Apartment Buildings

By John DeCicco, Rick Diamond, Sandra Nolden, Janice DeBarros, and Tom Wilson. Forward by Stephen Morgan.

This book reviews building characteristics, energy use, and barriers to conservation in existing five-or-more unit multi-family housing, and presents an up-to-date overview of approaches for audit and retrofit, energy-saving technology, conservation programs, evaluation, and financing strategies.

Energy Conservation in Multifamily Housing: Review and Recommendations for Retrofit Programs

By John DeCicco, Loretta Smith, Rick Diamond, Steve Morgan, Janice DeBarros, Sandra Nolan, Theo Lubke and Tom Wilson.

Reviews current energy conservation issues in multifamily buildings and covers sector characteristics, barriers to conservation, progress in technology, retrofit programs, financing, and evaluation. Drawing on this review and contacts with practitioners, the paper concludes with a set of recommendations for programs, policies, and research needed to advance energy conservation in this challenging sector.

Internet Resources The U.S. Department of Energy for Sustainability http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/ A networking hub for government and private-sector sustainability initiatives.

The entire Sustainable Building Technical Manual is available here as a free download.

G.E.O Green Building Resource Center http://www.geonetwork.org/gbrc/ A large collection of sustainability and buildings Internet links, a book list with direct-ordering arrangment through the online bookstore Amazon-com, listings of green designers and other green building professionals, and many other resources.

CREST http://www.crest.org CREST is a great starting point for any search on energy and sustainability related topics. Among the resources housed are content of the Greening of White House CD-ROM and archives from the greenbuilding and strawbale mailing lists.

Green Building and Sustainable Communities Resources

137

Appendix B â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Acknowlegements Funding for the development of A Blueprint for Greening Affordable Housing: Developer Guidelines for Resource Efficiency and Sustainable Communities was provided to Global Green USA (GG USA) by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). We would like to thank DOE for their generous support of these Guidelines and other GG USA activities and give a special mention to Mike Myers, previously at DOE for his continued guidance and leadership. We would also like to thank Southern California Edison and Pasadena Water and Power, whose support made printing of the document possible. In addition, on going support has been provided by the Home Depot, Bank of America, and Turner Foundations from the beginning of GG USAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Greening Affordable Housing Initiative.

GG USA wishes to express deep appreciation to the Advisory Board and additional reviewers for reading and commenting on several drafts and providing their expertise and experience to the project. In addition, we would like to thank individuals in the affordable housing and energy/resource-efficient building arenas who provided valuable information on specific issues, projects, and case studies. A special thank you to all of the GGUSA staff, especially Matt Petersen for his vision and leadership, Lynn N. Simon for her inspiration (and perspiration!), Walker Wells for seeing the project through to completion, and Gretchen Knudsen and Mary Luevano for their tremendous support. We would also like to thank our graphic designer, Garland Kirkpatrick for his enduring patience. This project would not have succeeded without the assistance of all these individuals.

A heartfelt thanks to all!

138

Acknowledgements

Advisory Board Perry Bigelow, The Bigelow Group Charles Buki, Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Dennis Creech, Southface Energy Institute Helen Dunlop, National Low-Income Housing Coalition John L. Knott Jr., Dewees Island Rose McNulty, AIA, Asian Neighborhood Design Mary Nelson, Bethel New Life Jonathon Rose, Affordable Housing Development Commission Alex Wilson, Environmental Building News

Additional Reviewers Harriet Tregoning, US EPA, The Smart Growth Network Rick Diamond, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Mark Ternes, Oakridge National Laboratory David Johnston, What's Working Richard Shoen, FAIA, University of California Los Angeles Cherilyn Parsons, Global Green USA

Green Building and Sustainable Communities Resources

139

Appendix C â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Global Green USA History and Mission Global Green USA was founded in 1994 by activist and philanthropist Dianne Meyer Simon after Mikhail Gorbachev invited her to join his environmental movement, Green Cross International (GCI).

GCI is based in Geneva, Switzerland and has affiliates in 21 countries. Headquartered in Santa Monica, California, GG USA has offices in Washington D.C. and San Francisco.

Acting as a catalyst, facilitator, and mediator, Global Green USA works in cooperation with individuals, industry, and government to create a global value shift toward a sustainable future. Through the Greening Affordable Housing Initiative, GG USA encourages collaborative approaches and innovative solutions to lower the energy bills of families in need, build healthier homes and neighborhoods, and protect the environment. GG USA's efforts include outreach to local and national stakeholders to increase awareness about the importance of sustainable development and how to make it an integral part of public policy and practice.

140

Global Green Overview and History

Green Building and Sustainable Communities Resources

141

GLOBAL GREEN USA 227 Broadway Suite 302 Santa Monica, California 90401 USA www.globalgreen.org