Building Capacity

Green Communities National Summit Identifies Challenges and Solutions: Keep it Up!

I recently attended the Enterprise Green Communities National Summit – Feb 27 and 28 in Dallas, TX. In fact, my colleague, Elly Bunzendahl and I delivered a Green Communities Criteria 101 training as a prelude to the National Summit, in part to provide an introduction to the Green Communities 2011 Criteria for Summit attendees who were not familiar with the program. Roughly 80 of the 200 summit registrants attended the training, suggesting that, even after more than seven years in the field, there are many newcomers to Green Communities' approach to greening affordable housing. This is a good sign.

For O’Brien & Company, the synergy of sustainability and affordable housing has always had gravity. Who better appreciates the benefits of lifecycle thinking than the client who is required to hold a new property for 30 or 40 years, or more! And what better way to address the “equity” component of sustainability’s “Three Es” (Environment, Economy, Equity) than in the pursuit of providing high performance, healthy housing to people who are economically and/or socially marginalized?

So, what of the Summit? In 2009, Enterprise deepened its commitment to green affordable housing by setting a goal that all the housing they helped produce or preserve would be green by 2013. This later evolved into a National Call to Action; that ALL publicly subsidized housing should have the opportunity to benefit from green practices by 2020. Prior to this National Summit, Enterprise held a series of regional Convenings in Denver, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.in 2011 and early 2012 to help focus the national discussion.

The goal of the National Summit was, through the participation of national affordable housing leaders, to identify the major barriers to achieving the 2020 objective and to identify innovative approaches to overcoming those barriers. The 200-person brainstorm was facilitated and focused using the services of AmericaSpeaks; a non-profit dedicated to engaging citizens in the democratic process, and experienced in the use of technology to enhance dialogue and sharing in large-group settings, among other things. Certainly, the ability to synthesize the ideas from twenty tables into a series of powerful themes that we could then vote on using personal, wireless voting tablets put the old-fashioned flip charts and dot-voting process to shame. And the fact that they could take the output of an eight-hour session with 200 people and summarize it into a 4-page hard-copy document that was handed to participants before they left the session was impressive indeed. Not inexpensive, for sure, but if you are involved in large group process and haven’t seen this technology at work, I urge you to check it out.

For me, a few things stood out from my personal discussions with attendees at the training, at my Summit table and from the synthesized themes from the whole group:

1. The affordable housing “universe” is made up of an uncommonly dedicated, creative and realistic collection of people – if we can’t figure out the solutions to this challenge, I’m sure no-one can!

 2. The dominant themes that drive this community were “creating resilient communities of choice that fulfilled the promise of the USA,” “promoting social justice,” “creating healthier outcomes for residents,” and, “reducing costs for owners and occupants.” Nothing very surprising here, but a happy blend of idealism and pragmatism;

3. Regarding challenges, the top items were:

• In Design, Construction and Operations: Reliable data for construction and operations; changing occupant behavior; and education (somewhat related).
• In Financing: Capturing the true costs and benefits; monetizing Long-term savings; and, devising a way to subsidized the first cost of green affordable housing.
• In Policy and Regulation: Inexperienced regulators, policy makers and funders; the need for incentives for owners and residents; and the lack of a consistent approach to green requirements across Qualified Allocation Plans from different federal and state agencies.

4. In terms of innovations and breakthroughs, the top items were:

• In Design, Construction and Operations: A central repository for design, cost/benefit, operations and performance data; incentives to facilitate behavioral changes among residents; and, a “Process in a Box,” – a turn-key, step-by-step guide for designing, building and operating a green affordable housing project. (Hey! Can this really be so hard?)
• In Financing: Devise more financing options, such as Green US Treasury Bonds, PACE and on-bill financing, social impact bonds, etc.; develop a financial product to monetize off-site effects such as water quality, human and community health; and standardize underwriting by GSEs and banks.
• In Policy and Regulation – Pass a GREEN Community Reinvestment Act that requires banks and insurance companies to require green practices in CRA investments; create a uniform national green building requirement with Treasury that would apply to ALL QAPs; and, make the connection between green strategies and human health more explicitly understood.

Overall, I came away feeling optimistic. A few, well thought out and implemented policy and financing interventions could move the focus from subtraction to integration. Instead of conversations about what needs to be value-engineered out to meet capital budget and the per unit cost caps, we have conversations on how to draw more capital into the first cost of the project in order to eliminate long term utility and O&M costs, and minimize replacement requirements.

The Summit also highlighted a couple of areas that need the same kind of positive, solution-based focus:

1. There is a woeful lack of meaningful performance data available on the achieved performance of green-certified multi-family projects, most particularly affordable projects. How can we make capturing and sharing this data routine and convenient? Can this be added to the scope of affordable development projects? This is worth more discussion.

2. An increasingly large percentage of the energy, water and health impacts of a residential unit is up to the behavior of the occupants. As designing in green features becomes the norm for affordable housing, more emphasis will need to be on addressing occupant behavior. We have worked with Enterprise to create, test, and promulgate effective models of residential engagement and education. Can these be routinely added to the scope of funding for new and existing affordable development projects?

Enterprise hopes to continue this discussion. If you want to participate, check out: http://enterprisecommunity.force.com/greenforum.

Did you enjoy this article?  You may also enjoy reading Green Resident Engagement Cards Inform AND Empower in California Non-Profit Housing Developments: Interview with Maria Elena Marquez-Brookes, LINC Housing’s Director of Resident Services

Alistair Jackson, CSBA is a Principal at O’Brien & Company. He was involved in the development of the original LEED for Homes Pilot Rating System and is, among other things, the Quality Assurance Designee (QAD) for O’Brien & Company’s role as LEED for Homes Provider. He is a strong advocate for market-led innovation and market transformation towards sustainability. He is also a father of two – and impatient for change towards a better future.

Squire Park’s First Woonerf Project Completes a Street - O'Brien & Company's Nora Daley-Peng ASLA, AICP, LEED AP BD+C, Interviews Bill Zosel

I recently reconnected with William (Bill) Zosel, a long-time resident of Squire Park who has been active in the neighborhood’s planning efforts for decades. We met for coffee at the newly opened Ba Bar restaurant, which is immediately adjacent to the soon-to-be constructed E. James Court woonerf and Woonerf Park.

I first met Bill five years ago when I provided urban designer services on Squire Park Reclaiming the Streets for the People Project. That project emphasized ‘street reclaiming’ as a way of expanding the sense of place beyond the walls of buildings into neighborhood sidewalks and streets. The goal of ‘street reclaiming’ is to connect neighbors and build community vitality. Among the list of community-generated ideas of how to make Squire Park’s neighborhood streets greener, friendlier, and safer was the concept of creating a collection of three woonerfs within the south-end of 12th Avenue. Through the dedicated efforts of neighborhood leaders and combined funding through Seattle Parks and Green Spaces Levy and Pro Parks Levy Opportunity Funds that idea is becoming a reality.

Q. Please tell me more about the E. James Court woonerf and the Woonerf Park project.

A. The concept is to convert E. James Court into a woonerf and to flank the entrance of the woonerf with a community park. This is a modest, one-block woonerf, so co-locating it with the park helps anchor it to 12th Avenue and visually-expands its presence.

Q. What makes this project a woonerf?

A. It is a street that gives priority to pedestrians and cyclists over cars. It is really about transforming the street into a social gathering place rather than a through way for travel. Cars can still snake through the street and even park on the street. On-street parking is actually a device to slow down traffic.

Q. I understand the competition for funding was pretty stiff. What set this project apart?
Image Credit: Design by Hewitt for Seattle Parks and Recreation

A. First off, the project met all three of the Parks’ criteria for funding – the project is in an area that is rapidly growing, that lacks parks, and has an underserved population. Beyond this, it is about maintaining a healthy diversity of community residents along the edge of Seattle University’s campus. It is great to have Seattle University in our neighborhood but we also want to retain the existing single-family homes that add so much character this neighborhood.

Q. What is the main design concept for the woonerf and park?

A. The big idea is to create a community gathering place that is flexible enough to accommodate two people meeting for coffee up to 500 people assembling for an outdoor concert. On an ordinary day, the park provides a variety of seating options for individuals and groups. During a special event, the woonerf can be temporarily closed to create a large venue for a festival. The design allows access for food trucks and a plaza area that is big enough to double as a performance stage.

Q. What about the edges of the project?

A. Creating active edges is very important in making this project a success. The Douglas at Seattle University is being constructed on the north side of the E. James Court. This is a mixed-use development with retail on the first floor and student apartments above. We are fortunate to have the same design team – led by Hewitt – to seamlessly join The Douglas and woonerf projects. Immediately to the south of the park is the newly opened Ba Bar restaurant. The hope is that students, residents, employees, and restaurant patrons will all use this park.

Q. What is the paving design for the woonerf and park?

A. The concept is to use the crisp edges of the adjacent streets and sidewalks to frame the softer, rounded landscape forms. Parts of E. James Court’s existing concrete will be saw-cut, removed, and repurposed as paving for a runnel that conveys stormwater through the park and woonerf to a storm drain on 13th Avenue. The paving in the park will have aripple pattern that will look different from different perspectives. From some vantage points, it will appear ordered and from other angles it will look free-flowing. The ripple paving pattern will also help channel stormwater to the runnel.                            

Q. Can you elaborate on some of the other sustainable design features?

A. Our neighborhood is working on a Pollinator Pathway project along Columbia Street from 12th Avenue to 29th Avenue. The intent is to create a pathway for pollinating insects through a series of native gardens in sidewalk planting strips. The woonerf and park project is including plants from the Pollinator Pathway plant palette to assist in this effort.

Q. What types of furniture will be in the park?

A. We would like to provide a moveable and fixed seating options. Moveable furniture allows park users to manipulate their environment such as arranging furniture to be in or out of the sun. Another neat concept is to provide community table where neighbors could gather for a potluck.
Image Credit: Design by Hewitt for Seattle Parks and Recreation

Q. What will make this park special?

A. We want this place to be intriguing. The design includes a variety of elements that keep people interested in what is going on overhead and underfoot. The design team includes public artist Ellen Sollod . Through a collaborative process, the team developed ways to bring light, movement, and texture into the space. The Cloud is an overhead canopy that reflects color and light. The canopy is a metaphor for the sky and is composed of off-the-shelf stainless steel convex mirrors of varying sizes. These are the same mirrors used in parking garage applications. The Pillow is a spongy blue seating/climbing area directly underneath The Cloud. The Pillow is a metaphor for water. It is made of the same spongy material used in playgrounds. Using these ordinary materials in non-traditional ways creates another layer of intrigue.

Q. What would you have done differently?

A. We weren’t able to completely eliminate the curb separation between the sidewalks and the street. Woonerfs use other ways to protect pedestrian-only zones from auto traffic such as plantings, street furniture, and public art. Our project masks the curbs with rounded landscape forms. The design does eliminate curbs for the portion of the woonerf that runs through the park, making it a level plane for pedestrian movement.

Q. What makes a street complete?

A. It is an open invitation for people to use the street to meet and mingle. I think we can’t stop at the street. We need to make complete neighborhoods.

Q. What’s next?

A. The goal is to make woonerfs a hallmark of this neighborhood. We have two more nearby streets – E. Barclay Court and E. Remington Court - that make excellent candidates for woonerfs. We want to take what we learned from E. James Court woonerf and replicate it. Maybe even push the boundaries of what is possible further.

O'Brien & Company is turning 20! 
Come join us in celebrating 20 years of Building Capacity! 
Save the Date:   September 15th, 4-7pm!

 

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles:
Interview with City of Shoreline’s Juniper Nammi
How Can Communities Accelerate Change Towards Green Building?

"Extreme" Collaboration: Crossing boundaries to achieve sustainable goals mark these initiatives

A number of sustainability initiatives in the Northwest illustrate the power of "extreme" collaboration. Initiated through the research of a PhD student studying the climate change mitigation efforts of jurisdictions within King County, the Cities Climate Collaboration gained momentum through staff members enthused by the idea of learning about and from neighboring cities’ efforts. These champions formed the basis of what has grown into a steering committee, comprised of city and county staff and partner organization representatives.

King County showed early support to the effort, and wrapped planning efforts together with ongoing initiatives, such as the Sustainable Cities Roundtable (now in its third year) and Green Tools. The Collaboration was formally launched on June 9th at a special event Roundtable, where King County Executive Dow Constantine (shown in photo) officially pledged support as a signatory along with several other Mayors. Six mayors have now signed the pledge.

As signatories to the Pledge, King County cities will partner on climate change outreach, coordination of standards, strategies and goals, climate mitigation solutions, and -- sealing the deal as an action-oriented effort – funding commitments for shared resources.  The Collaboration is unique in that the group is grounded in local efforts, experience, and action, but tethered by common higher level commitments such as the US Conference of Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement, and ICLEI membership.

Another noteworthy collaborative model that has emerged includes the City of Seattle’s 2030 District – a public-private partnership effort of property owners, managers, design professionals and City of Seattle to create the nation’s first High Performance Building District. In this case, it’s an effort largely driven by a committed private sector group who in other respects might be seen as competitors – each working to maximize energy savings to their best ability in order to achieve an aggregate energy savings across the entire portfolio of properties within the district. After incubating for a year, 2030 District officially launches this week. Its visionaries hope to become a replicable model for similar collaborations in other cities.

Finally, at a national scale the Emerald Cities Collaborative (EEC) leverages the expertise, assets and skills of the public and private sector to create clean economy cities. Seattle and Portland are two of several early municipal partners who have signed on to the EEC. The EEC is a national non-profit based in Washington, DC that pools the resources of 21 national partners – organizations targeting green economies, the environment and community development – along with local partners such as non-profits, labor and industry groups, workforce development, and training centers, and city signatories to forge energy efficiency and sustainable development solutions at the local level. 

Working together towards a common goal is not unusual. What is unique about these initiatives is the willingness to cross economic, political, and social boundaries that have hitherto seemed uncrossable, making their efforts much more robust, and more ambitious goals attainable. As the father of evolution Charles Darwin said, “In the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.”

Andrea Lewis, CSBA, LEED AP ID+C is Senior Project Associate at O’Brien & Company. She has provided assistance to King County’s Green Tools and Sustainable Cities Roundtables initiatives since 2009 and is a regular contributor to the Building Capacity Blog. King County Photo by Ned Ahrens.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Type of Construction for Passive House System
Interview with City of Kirkland’s Ellen Miller-Wolfe
Interview with Schacht Aslani Architects’ Walter Schacht
How Can Communities Accelerate Change Towards Green Building?

"Green" Resident Engagement Cards Inform AND Empower in California Non-Profit Housing Developments: Interview with Maria Elena Marquez-Brookes, LINC Housing’s Director of Resident Services

Enterprise Community Partners offers technical resources and training grants for affordable housing communities. In 2010 O’Brien & Company developed a suite of customizable engagement tools to educate and inspire affordable housing residents about green features in their buildings and how to sustainably operate and maintain their home and make healthy lifestyle choices. The primary tool is a set of Resident Engagement Card templates, developed in Power Point. O’Brien & Company also developed companion tools, including a User Guide, a short Tutorial video, a video highlighting some of the universal key concepts covered in the cards, quiz question templates, and an image library. LINC Housing participated in a pilot to show how Enterprise’s new residential engagement tool can be customized for affordable housing agencies and then for specific properties.

Editor: What is LINC Housing and what do you do there? MARIA: LINC is a nonprofit developer of affordable housing for low-income seniors, families and individuals with special needs throughout the state of California. We are located in Long Beach, California. Since 1984 we have helped create more than 6,500 units of affordable housing in 59 communities across the state.

About six years ago I was hired as the Director of Resident Services, tasked with developing the resident services department otherwise known as LINC Cares. At LINC we feel it is important to go beyond simply offering housing and also provide life enhancing services.

With our senior communities, for example, we understand how important it is for our seniors to live independently for as long as possible, so we try and support this goal by providing opportunities to maintain their mental, physical, and social health with exercise and nutrition programs and community engagement activities such as game days. It may just look like Bingo or Arts and Crafts, but in fact we are providing an opportunity to exercise the mind, socialize and build new networks.

Likewise with our family communities, we provide after school programs for children and youth, where they receive tutoring, homework help and have the opportunity to engage in a variety of enriching programs. We hold Family Nights, sessions where families learn about the local resources in their community. We hope that by providing our families with information and increasing access to local services that we are taking a proactive approach and preventing crises from occurring or at least minimizing it.

Can you describe LINC’s role in this project and the process? What were you hoping to accomplish? Enterprise's residential engagement tool seemed to fit right in with our life-enhancing approach to resident services. Giving information to our residents is a great thing –coupling that with the tools to take action is even better. LINC Housing has been engaging residents in being stewards of their environment since 2006. What we learned from our experiences is you can't just tell people to "be green." It's too big. What does that mean? It's overwhelming. The engagement tool was an opportunity to expand on our experiences and break it down even further, making “being green” that much more doable. The tool allowed us to recognize and celebrate what our residents were already doing while providing them with new ideas or strategies they could adopt. And the best part of the tool was that because it was customized to the community we were able to identify stores or services in their neighborhood that could help support their behavior changes.

The specific property you chose to focus on for the pilot was the Pepperwood Apartments. Can you tell us little about Pepperwood? Pepperwood is in Rancho Cucamonga, providing 230 apartments to families. It was a market rate development that we purchased in 2006, converted to affordable housing, and renovated with "green" upgrades including: insulation, energy efficient appliances, heating and cooling, lighting, and low-flow toilets. The resident engagement cards were an opportunity to go back to the residents to make sure they understood how these features worked and how they could take better advantage of them.

How did you use the tool? For our pilot we ended up customizing 30 cards for Pepperwood. We knew that would be too much for a single sitting so we focused our first workshop on two things: some simple energy efficient things they could do, and creating a product they could use in their homes. We used 4-5 cards and used these to stimulate dialogue and to introduce ideas like creating an all purpose green cleaning product they could use at home. This project was greatly appreciated by residents who were looking for something inexpensive and environmentally safe. We also had each participant sign a commitment card;the commitment cards focused on behaviors or strategies the participant was planning on adopting. We plan to check in with these residents in three months.

How did it go? Really well. We were a little surprised; since we held it directly following our after school program, we expected youth to stay and participate. We didn't really expect adults to come. It was a two-hour meeting on a weeknight, dinner included. We had 27 participants, including 15 kids and 12 adults ranging in age from 7 years old to someone in their 60’s. We had moms, dads, grandparents, and whole families participating and everyone stayed right to the end. People were really engaged. And everyone left with a product they had made and could use at home. (The children made play dough.)

So the pilot was successful? Yes, and in more ways than we thought. The cards were about engaging the residents, but it also ended up being a great tool for dialogue with property management, asset management, and housing development staff. In our customization process, there were things we learned through our discussions with community staff. For example, at Pepperwood, we learned that clothes line drying was against policy.

We also learned from Pepperwood's property manager that she was struggling to get cooperation regarding cleaning the lint from dryers. Since this can help make a dryer act more efficiently, it was something we could point out as an energy saver. Residents can hear the message from someone other than the property manager, therefore, validating it.

What's next? We plan on using the generic cards next in one of our senior communities. One thing I liked about working with Kelly (at O'Brien & Company) was that in working with me on getting the cards ready for Pepperwood she would always have a question I didn’t think about, and she would keep digging deeper. In the end we ended up with some great customized cards and with skills to meet the specific needs of all our communities. We want this experience to last for the long haul. We also plan to use the cards as a basis for a community-specific booklet we can hand out to every resident.

Do you have plans to customize the cards for other properties? Yes, two properties, including SEASONS at Compton, which is scheduled to open in summer 2011. SEASONS at Compton will serve a blend of limited income seniors, seniors with developmental disabilities, and seniors who care for dependents with developmental disabilities. The project is registered with the U.S. Green Building Council and is set to achieve LEED Gold Certification. The complex will include environmental features like photovoltaic panels and solar thermal hot water, as well as accessibility features like wider doorways and hallways, adjustable height counters, lower light switches, ramps, and elevators. A bioswale will be used to filter rainwater runoff and collecting silt and pollution before it enters the sewer system. This is very exciting and we have a great opportunity to customize cards for this unique community.

Do the cards only work on "green facilities? No, there are lots of cards that have to do with one's lifestyle and the choices we make, and are not dependent on living in a green building. Again, it is about what our residents can do. They can change out light bulbs, use green cleaning products, recycle or simply walk to the local store.

What lessons learned would you like to share? Engage as many people as you can. We work at such a fast pace, I grabbed at the pilot opportunity without realizing the extent of the project. Fortunately, everyone was as excited about the project as we (resident services) were and provided the support we needed. Engaging everyone who needed to get involved did slow the process down but it was well worth it. The engagement tool is much more effective because everyone from corporate to property staff to residents have had a hand in shaping it.

The other lesson we learned was that today’s youth are much more informed on environmental issues than we ever were at their age. They are familiar with recycling for example, because they've been hearing about that in school for most of their lives. They can be great allies for your resident engagement program and should be part of the development process.

Maria Elena Marquez-Brookes is Director of Resident Services for LINC Housing where she continues a life of "giving back" to the community, something she learned growing up in a community-oriented family. A social worker by training, she has been a community organizer, activist and in addition to her work at LINC serves as a field instructor for other up and coming social workers. This interview was conducted by Kathleen O'Brien, President of O'Brien & Company, and editor of Building Capacity Blog. For more information on how your agency can use this tool, Enterprise Community Partners plan to host a webinar “Introducing New Resident Engagement Tools for Affordable Housing Developers and Owners” on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 from 2:00 PM to 3:30 PM (EST)

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Sound Mental Health's LEED Platinum Housing Project
Interview with Schuchart's Joe Giaudrone
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Mechanical Systems and Fuel Choices for the Warming World
Gut Rehab: Groll Residence Turns 1918 Home from “Leaky” to Green

Capacity Building Tool for Planners hoping to achieve Net Zero Water Buildings and Neighborhoods Marks World Water Day

Although the energy crisis has long held our attention in the green building world, the global water crisis urgently needs our attention. That’s because we can do a lot to reduce the consumption of water, and in particular, potable water, in the way we design our buildings and neighborhoods. To celebrate World Water Day, and its 2011 focus on urban water systems, our friends at the Cascadia Green Building Council (CGBC) have released “Toward Net Zero Water: Best Management Practices for Decentralized Sourcing and Treatment.”

The authors, Katie Spataro and Joel Sisolak, Cascadia’s Research Director and Advocacy and Outreach Director, respectively, have produced what I predict will be a significant capacity building tool for communities hoping to achieve net zero water at the building and neighborhood scale. The report contains an overview of best practices and technologies for decentralized and distributed water systems, with special focus placed on rainwater harvesting, greywater reclamation and reuse, and on-site wastewater treatment for reuse – the systems that face the highest hurdles when it comes to permitting them. (Presumably it is for this reason the manual does not address on-site stormwater management systems and fixture efficiencies, both of which do contribute to net zero water schemes, but also enjoy greater regulatory acceptance in the past few years. There are also plenty of resources out there  on these topics, including one O'Brien & Company helped develop: “The Low Impact Development (LID) Guidance Manual  for Kitsap County".)

Each BMP chapter describes major system components, how the systems work, and background on appropriate scale and efficiency. Design considerations are provided for system sizing, location, and integration with other building systems. And, because case studies can be very compelling, there are several demonstrating the best practices covered. The manual is more of a planning tool then a design tool; for each system, resources are provided to find more in-depth technical details.

Katie and Joel have done their homework and made it easy for us. Though there is a tremendous amount of information on these systems out there, it isn’t easy to access in a methodical, efficient manner. They’ve sifted through it all, gleaned the credible data, and organized it in a way that is useful. No fear, this is not a “cheerleading” document, but you also don’t have to be an engineer to “get it.”

The Living Building Challenge’s net zero water imperative requires “closed-loop” water systems, and that is the focus of the manual. Mark Buehrer, of 2020 Engineering, and a peer reviewer for the study has long held that closed-loop water designs are “critical for net zero water buildings.” I concur. Similar to the low impact development approach to stormwater, decentralized on-site closed-water systems can mimic nature better. Because they are more site-appropriate, they will be diverse, but the overall approach of these small-scale systems remain the same: begin with super-efficient measures to reduce overall water demand, and then treat the water needed for potable and non-potable uses.

When faced with the facts that many cities around the country are anticipating water shortages; that the cost of replacing our steadily degrading water and wastewater infrastructure is huge; and that the money (and political will) to invest in centralized infrastructure is dwindling, it only makes sense to stop using potable water for uses that don’t require it, and to find more agile and effective ways to supply and treat our water.

Building Capacity Blog is edited by Kathleen O’Brien, a Cascadia Fellow, and President of O’Brien & Company, a green building consultancy, founded nearly 20 years ago, and located in Seattle, Washington, providing services in green project consulting, sustainability policies, plans, and programs, and education. Sisolak and Spataro are among the line-up of presenters at this year’s Living Future (April 27-29 in Vancouver, BC). Their session, “Getting to Net Zero,” digs into the elements of the Living Building Challenge water petal and regulatory challenges impeding the progress of net-zero water projects. Cover image courtesy of Cascadia Green Building Council.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Envisioning a Net-Zero Water Future
Interview with Schacht Aslani Architects’ Walter Schacht
Interview with Kitsap Home Builders Foundation’s Art Castle

Don’t Touch My Building: Yvonne Kraus, LEED AP balances energy efficient adaptive reuse with historic preservation

As the green building industry’s focus has shifted toward adaptive reuse and retrofitting the existing building stock, the debate about balancing retrofit needs with historic preservation guidelines has moved to the forefront.

In our current work developing an Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy with the City of Ellensburg, this issue is salient. Ellensburg has a historic downtown with an active historic preservation interest group, but this real estate is significantly underutilized. Although street level spaces in the downtown are mostly maintained and leased, upper stories are virtually abandoned. Retrofits could improve energy performance and make these spaces more desirable for tenants who now look for space in modern developments outside of the City core. At the mere mention of revising building codes to allow for incorporation of renewables on existing buildings, however, a protest arose at the thought of installing PV panels on historic buildings.

So do we touch historic buildings to make them more efficient? What can we do, and how do we best balance historic preservation needs with adaptive reuse and energy efficiency goals? These questions have been on my mind for several months now. During a recent trip to The Netherlands, Germany, and Austria, I kept my eyes open to see how these countries are addressing this issue. There’s a visible juxtaposition of old rural villages and brand new renewable energy technology in much of the countryside(s) I visited. In The Netherlands, old wooden windmills sit next to sleek new wind farms and historic straw roof farms have incorporated on-site solar. In Germany, PV blankets the roofs of old barns and farms, and Germany’s solar incentive program has been so successful that the government has had to place it on hold to catch up with demand. In Austria, the roofs of many farms and inns in the 1,000 year old village of Soelden are dotted with solar hot water and PV panels. In my opinion, there is a true beauty in this mix of old and new. Not to mention efficiency and excitement for the future.

Adaptive Reuse is conventionally defined as the process of adapting old structures for new purposes. Much of the debate surrounding adaptive reuse pertains to whether it makes sense to keep the building and retrofit it, or tear down and build new, but that’s another issue that we’ll explore in a future article. New buildings are now designed with rigid and strong exteriors, yet flexible floor plans interiors making adaptive reuse in the future more likely.

Historic Preservation is part of a national movement to protect buildings that are least 50 years old and are associated with, or significant for, historic people or events, architecture, craftsmanship, or design; or are valuable for historical research. At the federal level, the National Park Service (NPS), part of the U.S. Department of the Interior, oversees the National Register of Historic Places which is an official federal list of districts, sites, structures, buildings, and objects that are deemed worthy of preservation. It’s important to know that the National Register is primarily a tool to recognize historic properties - it does not mandate how they must be treated. A listing thus helps to protect a property but it does not restrict property owners. This is where the state and City regulations come in: they can add restrictions to a listed property, and they do this through State Historic Preservation Offices (“shippoes”). Shippoes were federally mandated to carry out provisions of the Act of 1966 and their role is to locate and record historic resources, nominating these resources to the National Register, and providing technical assistance and consultation. There are also some State Historic Registers (Washington State has one: the Dept of Archeology & Historic Preservation) as well as municipal programs that recognize local historic sites or districts, and these come with their own sets of regulations that often go beyond federal regulation in restricting what private property owners can do.

When sustainability planners ponder adaptive reuse, both on old buildings and those on the historic register, the issue of embodied energy comes up. According to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, about 80 billion BTUs of energy are embodied in a typical 50,000-square-foot commercial building. That’s equivalent to 640,000 gallons of gasoline, which is wasted if you tear the building down. On top of that, demolishing that same 50,000-square-foot building creates about 4,000 tons of waste. Construction of the replacement building will take additional energy in construction, natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste. Preservation Green Lab (see resources) is conducting a study that will provide more information on this topic, and we’ll report on this study in the near future.

According to Patrice Frey’s research for “Building Reuse: Finding a Place on American Climate Policy Agendas,” Older buildings can actually be remarkably energy efficient because of their quality of construction, their downtown or central locations, and their use of passive heating and cooling methods. When the GSA examined its buildings inventory in 1999, it found that utility costs for historic buildings were 27% less than for more modern buildings. We need to hold on to buildings that are well designed, that meaningfully link us to our past, and that have plenty of good use left in them.

When considering adapting historic buildings with a sustainable design, consider these key factors:

1. Don’t break the rules. Bottom line, there are standards you must follow outlined in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The standards seem rigid, but there’s significant flexibility as long as you are consistent with the character of the building. Consider it a “design challenge.”
2. Lengthen your planning horizon. This applies whether you are adapting or constructing new, but after a trip to Europe this is at the top of my mind.
3. Be passive. Old buildings relied on passive strategies. Maintaining a passive approach will save money, keep renovations simpler, and make O&M easier.
4. Embodied energy. We’ve already touched on this. We’ll discuss the science behind this in our next post on this topic.
5. Verify operating energy. In doing energy modeling of an existing building, you might find it’s better than you thought it would be. Don’t assume it’s an energy hog because it’s old.
6. Work with your local preservationists. It’s best to develop an overarching strategy to your project, to determine what’s sacred, and what’s open to change. And provide opportunities to learn how historic buildings and sustainability goals overlap.
7. Don’t make assumptions about windows. There may be other ways to amp up a building’s energy efficiency. In the ongoing renovations of the historic Empire State Building the developers took the creative path of upgrading the existing windows rather than replacing them. Floor by floor they are removing  windows, “re-manufacturing” them on-site using local labor (meaning more green jobs!) The result are windows that test to R-8 and “fit.”
8. Take advantage of resources. See below .

Resources:

• Preservation Green Lab: National Trust for Historic Preservation.
• The Sustainability Initiative, National Trust for Historic Preservation.
• The American Institute of Architects Historic Resources Committee.
• The Association for Preservation Technology
• International Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
• The National Park Service Technical Preservation Services.  
• Historic Preservation and Green Building: A Lasting Relationship Feature - Environmental Building News January 2007. 
• Building Reuse: Finding a Place on American Climate Policy Agendas. Patrice Frey, Paul Anderson, Monica Andrews, and Carl Wolf. National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Yvonne Kraus, LEED AP and CSBA and Senior Project Associate for O'Brien & Company, Inc. specializes in green building program development, community and corporate sustainability strategies, and LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M. She is the Project Manager for the City of Ellensburg’s Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy (EECS), and led the development of the Economic Sustainability Strategy for the City of Kirkland (adopted), and of the Sustainability Strategy for the City of Sammamish (under consideration for adoption). The photo of Ellensburg's downtown was taken by Bob Bengford of Makers Architecture, leading a Land Development Code Update for the City concurrent to and integrated with the EECS project.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
LEED EB: O+M's Energy Threshold
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Passive House: A Bit of Overkill
Cracking the Energy Code: What Will It Cost?
Sweet Sustainability on the Ancient St. James Way

Client Health and Autonomy, Building Durability, and Cost Control were Key Drivers for Sound Mental Health’s LEED Platinum Housing Project in Seattle, Washington

Kathleen O'Brien interviews project designer Chirstina Bollo.

 

 

Kenyon House is an 18-unit two-story affordable housing project for previously homeless people with disabilities and fragile health. The project was developed by Housing Resources Group, AIDS Housing of Washington, and Sound Mental Health, all 501©3 organizations. O’Brien & Company provided initial rating, technical assistance, field application assistance, and performance testing and site verification of the envelope installation.

The project was the first project in the State of Washington to attain LEED for HomesPlatinum certification for affordable housing and only the second in the United States. It was completed in 2008 and featured in GreenBuild 2009’s LEED Project Showcase. According to Owner Sound Mental Health’s Trish Blanchard (Chief Clinical Officer), the agency is “grateful for this beautiful and sustainably built project and the partnerships that made it possible. Kenyon House provides supportive housing for some of the neediest and hardest-to-house in our community.”

Christina, you were the Project Designer with SMR Architects on the Kenyon House Project. What was your experience with “green” design prior to this project?I was lucky enough to study at the University of Oregon with John Reynolds and Alison Kwok from 1999 to 2002. While there I was involved with the Agents of Change Vital Signs Case Study Project, which included investigating actual buildings, conducting post-occupancy surveys, and developing case studies based on real world results. I’ve been interested in sustainability from the beginning.

It shows! You managed to achieve the highest LEED rating on the project. Was that planned from the beginning? Yes and no. From the beginning, I was referring to the LEED for Homes checklist to make sure the design was meeting the standard. But the owner was not planning to get the project certified. That changed when the non-profit developer found funding for certification. It was actually pretty late in the game, but because I’d been using the LEED checklist all along the project was actually able to do pretty well.

I’ll say. Was LEED the driver then for your decisions? I would not say that. It informed   but did not drive the sustainability decisions. Thinking about the owner’s goals and the residents needs was truly what drove them. For the owners, it was important to design a building that would last 50 years -- the term of the funding requirement. So for example, we detailed the windows so they can be replaced without tearing the building envelope apart. We used a fiber cement rainscreen for a more durable enclosure and focused on durability throughout. Of course the other big issue for the owner is cost of operating the facility. So saving energy and water was also a priority. All of this matches very well with LEED for Homes.

And what about the residents?Thermal comfort and good indoor air quality are always important in a residential setting, but especially in this one, where the occupants are in fragile health. I will say that LEED for Homes is much more suitable for this type of project. One concern with the non-residential LEED standard was its smoking prohibition. In a situation like this, such a ban would actually encourage surreptitious smoking, perhaps causing fires. Continuous ventilation was obviously key.

Any hiccups getting into LEED so late?We had a few stressful moments. O’Brien & Company had to submit a CIR for the paper-faced drywall already installed for the tub enclosure. They determined the drywall could meet the performance requirements, especially since we had the contractor apply a primer to the board. But probably the most challenging aspect of implementing LEED so late in the game was our needing to solicit signatures for accountability forms from consultants who had been off the project for quite some time. We got it done, but it was daunting.

How did your contractor feel about the added LEED performance requirements? Our contractor Walsh Construction was pretty enthusiastic about it. They saw it as an opportunity to learn advanced sealing techniques and committed to implementing them on all of their projects as a matter of practice.

Besides LEED performance, what else about the project meshes with the goal of sustainability? Social equity is an important aspect of sustainability. For the owner, above all else was the desire to create an autonomous, independent living situation for the residents, while fostering interaction between them and staff. The lobbies and central staircases were designed to force circulation past the case workers’ office. Yet, the studios are totally self-sufficient. The backyard was deliberately set aside for vegetable gardens maintained by the tenants. So it’s a nice mix of community and privacy.

You mentioned community. How do the neighbors feel about the project?Well actually the project addressed a safety problem the neighborhood was dealing with. The zoning called for the long side facing E-W (perpendicular to the street). This was terrible orientation for passive heating and cooling (as well as daylighting). The site’s original configuration also made for a pass-through for “hooligans.” Turning the building, so the long side now faced SW (with the front facing S), helped provide a buffer against such straying and entirely changed the building’s energy performance potential for the better. It was definitely a win-win and a no-brainer getting through to the city. This configuration also made more space for the tenant’s backyard garden.

Looking back, how do you feel about the project now? I am very happy with it. In fact, I’m finding it difficult to leave it behind! The landscaping budget was pretty tiny. So for a while it was a very fancy building sitting in a bunch of mulch. I’ve been involved with a series of volunteer landscaping projects for the front yard. And now that the Seattle Department of Transportation has started allowing it, I’m hoping we can do something fun with the parking strip. It gets great light all year round.

Christina Bollo designs environmentally and socially sustainable homes for homeless people and people with special needs. She received a Master of Architecture degree from the University of Oregon and is a registered architect in Washington State. She is the chair of the Seattle Pedestrian Advisory Board and a member of the national board of Architects/ Designers/ Planners for Social Responsibility.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Interview with LINC’s Maria Elena Marquez-Brookes
Interview with KCR’s Larry Eyre
LEED Rescue: How Projects Get Into Trouble and How to Get Out
Costs & Associated Benefits of LEED Certification

Shoreline's Sustainability Strategy Bears Fruit: Interview with Juniper Nammi, Associate Planner, AICP.

  
Editor: The theme of this blog is to provide inspiration and practical advice to help build capacity in the realm of sustainability and green building. In 2007, O’Brien & Company partnered with the planning firm AHBL to help develop an Environmental Sustainability Strategy for the City of Shoreline. This Fall, we checked in with Juniper Nammi, Associate Planner for the City of Shoreline, and Project Manager for our contract to see how implementation of the Strategy is going.

Before we get into today, let’s provide the reader with some background. Can you provide a little history for our reader? JUNIPER: Certainly. As of 2006, there was actually a good deal happening throughout the City’s departments and among our residents with regard to sustainability. But there was nothing tying all of these efforts together and no comprehensive guidance going forward. In 2006 the City Council added "creating an environmentally sustainable community" to its goals. Under the Council’s charge, City Staff leadership worked on what this might mean and determined that a plan or strategy to define and direct municipal and community wide efforts towards sustainability would be helpful. The Council approved a consultant budget of $75K (keep in mind this was different economic times!) and City Staff leadership created an interdepartmental team to work with the consultant team. This team was the foundation for our green team which still functions today and is a key component of Strategy Implementation. The process took one year, and included review of our Comprehensive Plan and Development Code regulations, interviews with various city staff, and two very important community conversations. The Strategy document went through an intensive review and was adopted formally by the Council in 2008 with unanimous support of Council, Planning Commission, and the Parks Board.

You mentioned an interdepartmental green team as a key component of Strategy Implementation. What is your role on the team and how does the team function? I’m co-chair of the green team along with Miranda Redinger. We have about 13-15 members at any given time and meet monthly, although there are subcommittees that meet in between to do more specific tasks. I’m happy to say that all City departments are committed and the work is included in our work plans. With lean times, it is definitely a challenge to get full support from every team member all the time, but the team does provide a city-wide forum for the implementation of ideas generated during and since the strategic planning process in 2007-08. As I mentioned earlier, prior to the Strategy there were a number of individual efforts going on. This team gives us all a better understanding of what's happening in other departments, and allows us to collaborate. It enables us to do what we are already doing, better, and to build on that.

What kind of budget does the team have? Not much. We have a few hundred dollars for direct expenses. However, sustainable elements recommended in the Strategy are being integrated into many of the City's projects. An important outcome of the strategic planning process was to add the question -- What are the sustainability implications for your project? -- to the budgeting process.

Bravo! What other positive outcomes have you seen? The Strategy provided a good starting point for the green team’s discussions, but it intentionally wasn’t a prescriptive plan. If you visit our City’s website you will see projects that have been completed or are in-progress that were identified at the community conversations we held as part of the strategic planning process. The City is also doing a better job of explicitly calling out the environmental sustainability implications of our plan updates and capital projects

A good example is our Transportation Master Planning process, which is currently underway. A number of specific recommendations in the Sustainability Strategy are related to transportation planning and the plan update is systematically reviewing those recommendations for incorporation into the Master Plan. Recommendations being considered include transit oriented development, improving the safety and connectivity of walking and biking routes in the City, and addressing transit service issues.

Anything else? We were able to secure grant funding for some projects including getting our sustainability indicators and baselines up on our website, conducting a carbon inventory, and updating our urban tree inventory and related regulations. Also, we have an approved framework for an environmentally preferable purchasing policy in place. Now we are working on specifics for various categories of purchases such as office supplies, janitorial supplies, or consulting contracts.

What about green building efforts? Planning and Environmental Services staff are currently developing a comprehensive Green Building Program, including evaluation of building codes, outreach materials, technical assistance and training opportunities, as well as incentives for greener buildings in our zoning standards. We are developing guidance for capital improvement projects to ensure sustainability is a consideration along with financial feasibility. In addition, we are in the process of benchmarking the energy efficiency of our facilities through a comprehensive carbon emissions inventory effort.

In addition to all the activity you've described, have you seen a change in the way City staff approach the concept of environmental sustainability? From the very beginning of the strategic planning process, the City Council and management staff recognized that environmental sustainability was not just about trees and recycling. There has definitely been an organizational shift in thinking about environmental sustainability, broadening staff understanding beyond the commonly understood environmental topics of habitat and the three Rs. Interdepartmental involvement supported by the leadership has been a big part of making this shift happen.

Strategy development engaged the community in planning. How is the public involved now? Public participation opportunities in environmental sustainability include outreach events such as Earth Day Every Day and Clean Sweep Recycling events, community meetings and public hearings related to specific plan and project development topics, and ongoing volunteer opportunities in our parks. At this time the City does not have a citizen committee or volunteer opportunity specifically related to the Sustainability Strategy implementation because the Green Team is primarily focused on city operations, updating processes, and developing new programs.

Any lessons learned you’d like to share with municipalities trying to do something similar? Start with the basics. In our case the leadership explicitly added sustainability as a value for our community. This begins to shape all other guiding documents and policies. And it is critical to have interdepartmental collaboration, even more so when our budgets are so constrained. For this to happen you need the blessing of your leadership, both from elected officials and City staff. Shoreline has been fortunate to have the continued support of our Council, our City Manager, Department heads, and the community at large.

Are there other tools besides a sustainable strategy that you feel are/could be useful for municipal planners? (Including tools that don’t exist but would be great if they did!) We need analytical and assessment tools that are easy to use -- for example, a Life Cycle Cost Analysis tool that doesn't require you to be an LCA expert. We also need tools that can help us convey the significance of the data in an articulate manner.

What do you think the big opportunities are there now for municipalities? We need to be looking at neighborhood or district level solutions -- although there can be challenges with maintaining centralized systems. Collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions will also be essential, especially given limited resources, to share ideas and tools that work as well as coordinate projects and ideas that need to be implemented at a larger scale. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel if the city next door has an excellent wheel model to get things rolling. Cascadia Green Building Council has issued a challenge to create Living Communities using the International Living Building Institute's Standard.. It will take some time and effort to shift the thinking of the building industry and general public as to why this approach is a good idea, but I think it's time to move beyond the low hanging fruit to more comprehensive steps toward sustainability.

Juniper Nammi is currently an Associate Planner with the City of Shoreline and a Shoreline resident. She acted as project manager for development of the Shoreline Environmental Sustainability Strategy and is currently co-chair of the City’s interdepartmental Green Team, which is charged with implementation of this Strategy. Juniper also works as part of the permit services team reviewing a wide variety of permits and assisting customers when they have questions about City regulations. She has a Masters degree in Water Resources Management from the University of Wisconsin-Madison (2004).

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Interview with City of Kirkland’s Ellen Miller-Wolfe
Vulcan’s Sustainable Real Estate Initiatives Have Deep Roots
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Interview with KCR’s Larry Eyre

Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies in Your Community (Part 2 of 2)

In looking at communities in general, an EE&C Strategy or Energy Plan will involve considering all of the ways energy is consumed in that community as a starting point, because this will also identify where the opportunities are. In this pie chart, we show just a few opportunities  associated with identifiable sectors of energy consumption.

It will also involve setting a baseline and future requirements for energy consumption and generation. With the EEC Strategy there is a strong interest in tying the effort into local economic development and job creation, so existing conditions in this arena would be helpful as well.

Remove Regulatory Barriers

The “third rail” of existing conditions is the regulatory arena. Communities seeking to establish energy plans may consider the ways in which their codes and regulations present possible barriers to implementing energy efficiency and conservation strategies. Evaluating codes and regulations against EEC Strategy goals is necessary to assess what stands in the way and needs to be either updated or eliminated, as well as what provisions may be missing. Obstacles can exist in the content of land use and development codes, design standards, building and energy codes, as well as in the regulatory process itself. Simply navigating the system for approvals can be off-putting to innovative energy projects.

Common land development code obstacles include provisions that restrict or prohibit onsite renewable energy systems. Height restrictions and setbacks may limit the feasibility of building-mounted systems such as PV or small wind turbines. In addition, strict provisions around building orientation and eave overhangs can deter passive solar design strategies. Updating codes to allow for greater flexibility during site planning to address solar orientation and instituting solar access regulations can result in measurable energy efficiency advancements for new developments.

Zoning codes have a direct relationship to a community’s transportation-related energy use. A recent study conducted by King County to map residential carbon pollution generated by neighborhood found that local urban form plays a significant role in the quantity of travel-related carbon emissions. The study found that mixed use neighborhoods had the most significant influence on carbon emissions, pointing towards the benefits of walkable, compact communities. Transportation energy savings can result from updating codes to promote infill and mixed-use development, reducing minimum lot sizes, and increasing densities or permitted Floor Area Ratios (FARs). These code changes support Smart Growth principles adopted by many communities, including greater connectivity and walkability.

Barriers can also exist in building codes and even in energy codes intended to promote energy efficiency! For example, structural and ventilation requirements may unintentionally conflict with advanced energy efficient measures such as superinsulation. Another problem is when energy efficient design strategies are not specifically prescribed. An example of the latter might be code "silence" regarding non-conventional construction such as strawbale. In these cases, building officials may require extensive (and expensive) testing to permit such strategies, require redundancies that make them economically infeasible, or prohibit them all together. Even less obvious are prohibitions by local health districts against water saving strategies such as composting toilets. Less water to treat means less pumping and process-related energy spent by the local wastewater treatment facility.

Energy codes establish minimum energy performance and often fail to incentivize higher performance and more efficient buildings. Lack of energy code enforcement or performance testing requirements or assistance, has resulted in many buildings falling short of meeting even minimum energy code standards.

A comprehensive approach to removing regulatory barriers involves not only updating existing standards but also filling in missing gaps. A number of communities are developing new standards for renewable energy and water conservation, such as solar and wind ordinances, or even requiring new homes to be solar-ready or pre-plumbed for water reuse. Flexibility within the codes to allow for demonstration projects to test innovative strategies is essential to provide information to policy makers that can be incorporated in future code updates. Lastly, regulatory agency staff need ongoing education and credible sources of information on energy efficient design strategies in order to make reasonable interpretations when faced with new technologies and practices. Understandably their main concern is avoidance of health and safety risks. Better information can reduce the perception of risk and open the door to energy saving innovations.

Identify Additional Opportunities

In addition to removing regulatory barriers, it is important in developing an EEC Strategy or Energy Plan to think beyond the typical regulatory construct. A number of opportunities exist for communities seeking to implement energy efficiency and conservation measures at both the building-specific and the community-wide scales. Examples of local jurisdictions at the forefront of progressive policies and regulations exist from around the country, serving as models for those just getting started with EEC Strategy planning. Evaluating a community’s existing energy use, identifying the biggest energy users, and defining a benchmark for measuring efficiency and conservation actions serves as an important starting point for future policies and regulations.

Resources:

US Dept. of Energy
Community Greening: How to Develop a Strategic Energy Plan www.nrel.gov/applying_technologies/pdfs/community_greening.pdf

US EPA
Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments www.epa.gov/region4/recycle/green-building-toolkit.pdf

Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute
Sustainable Community Development Code and Reform Initiative: http://law.du.edu/index.php/rmlui/sustainable-community-development-code-and-reform-initiative

US EPA
Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Urban and Suburban Zoning Codes: www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/essential_fixes.htm

Cascadia Green Building Council
Codes and Regulatory Research Publications
http://cascadiagbc.org/resources/research

Kathleen O'Brien is President of O'Brien & Company, a nationally respected green building consultancy founded in 1991. She is currently Principal-in-Charge for the firms planning, policy and programmatic work (including the Ellensburg project), and has been instrumental in the development of multiple sustainability strategies for government, non-profit, and private sector organizations. She served as an officer on the Cascadia Board of Directors in its early years and has been recognized by the organization as a Cascadia Fellow, a lifetime honorific. She is Editor of Building Capacity Blog.

Katie Spataro is Cascadia’s Research Director for Codes and Standards. Katie’s efforts to assist local governments with identifying obstacles and seeking pathways to support more sustainable development practices has assisted in the creation of policies, programs and code-related curriculum around the region. Katie heads up Cascadia’s Research Department which provides groundbreaking research and technical consulting services to help to further the adoption and understanding of the Living Building Challenge and other high performance policies, programs and standards.

Editors Note:O’Brien & Company and Cascadia Green Building Council are currently working together to develop a EEC Strategy for the City of Ellensburg, Washington, with the assistance of Makers Architecture & Urban Design, Transpo, and The Watershed Company. This work is in conjunction with an update of the Land Use Development Code, led by Makers. More in depth treatment of the topic is in the fall issue of Cascadia Green Building Councils publication, Trim Tab here: http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/95a19dea#/95a19dea/1

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Zugunruhe: Advice to Anxious Change Agents
How Communities Support the Use of FSC Certified Wood
Why Must We Reinvent the Wheel When Conducting Collaborative Change Projects?
Interview with City of Shoreline’s Juniper Nammi

Creating Effective Energy Efficiency& Conservation Strategies in Your Community: Getting Started (part 1 of 2)

Creating Effective Energy Efficiency& Conservation Strategies in Your Community: Getting Started

EECS & Strategic Energy Plans: What are they?

Many government municipalities around the country have taken advantage of Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) Strategy Block Grant money authorized by the National Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to fund strategies that reduce energy use and fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency in transportation, building, and other sectors as appropriate. For many cities, counties, and states, the funding represents an opportunity to act on commitments to respond to climate change, to identify and capture operational savings now and in the future as a measure of fiscal prudence, and to assist citizens in doing the same.

The Block Grant covers developing and implementing an EEC Strategy, which may include everything from conducting audits, developing financial incentive programs, analyzing and updating codes and enforcement, and implementing public education, among others.  Although the EEC Strategies we’ve seen thus far range in scope and detail, they generally include some form of action or implementation plan. Often this involves project descriptions with budgets and projected results associated with those budgets (such as energy savings, job creation, emissions reductions). The latter justification is used to prioritize and disburse remaining Block Grant monies.

Budgets for implementation can run to the millions. Las Vegas, Nevada’s Implementation Plan  announced in July of 2009 represented a proposed investment of nearly $28 million, including the planning element, and including items such as solar covered parking structures, a solar powered waste water treatment facility, facility and exterior lighting retrofits, financing and incentive programs, upgrading its green building program, and outreach. Charlotte, South Carolina has a more modest budget, roughly $6.5 million. Again, this investment is proposed for a number of different activities, primarily retrofits improving energy efficiency of existing facilities and incorporating renewable technologies. Like several of the EEC Strategies, the Charlotte Strategy proposes that some of this funding be used to staff a position to coordinate implementation.

A couple of good examples of EEC Strategy documents we’ve seen are those developed by Loudon County, Virginia and Topeka, Kansas.

In addition to EEC Strategies, we are also seeing a growing number of “Energy Plans” at the city, county, and state level. Not surprisingly, these are often allied with a concurrent commitment to addressing Climate Change. The City of San Diego’s “Energy Strategy for a Sustainable Future” is a good example of a stand-alone document. Burlington, Vermont’s Energy Plan is a section of the City’s 2006 Municipal Development Plan. King County, Washington, has an Energy Plan that it continues to update as it internalizes ongoing analyses of its operations and transportation energy efficiency measures and impacts.

An outline for an ideal strategic process for developing a community energy plan is provided by the Department of Energy (DOE) in its publication “Community Greening: How to Develop a Strategic Energy Plan.” Like most community strategic planning, the DOE outline proposes a stakeholder process, visioning and goal setting exercises, benchmarking existing conditions, identifying programs to fund as well as ways to fund them, prioritizing those programs, and memorializing all of this in a written document, which is then subject to review and ratification.

What’s Right for Your Community?

Embarking on an EEC Strategy will entail a unique process guided by the champions and leaders within your community, and influenced by resources available for the process. Although the Department of Energy process outline (discussed above) should work for most communities, the devil is in the details. It is our experience in community planning that a one-size-fits-all approach will not succeed. Each plan should be tailored to reflect the goals and interest of the stakeholders and be directly related to city and utility planning efforts. Begin by asking three high-level questions: 

• What planning efforts are already in place that would support an EEC Strategy such as comprehensive and code update cycles, greenhouse gas emissions planning, or community master planning?
• Where is the leadership and strongest support for efficiency and conservation within the community: the building and design sector, policy makers, public? 
• What federal, state or county technical assistance and funding is available to assist with strategic energy planning in your community?

Where to next?

Once you've pondered these questions, we anticipate a hunger for more information. Fortunately, resources abound for local governments seeking assistance with strategic energy planning, removing regulatory obstacles, and developing policies and standards in support of energy efficiency and renewables. A few of our favorites follow. In the meantime, good luck! Whether your motivation is operational savings, civic duty, or environmental protection -- or all of the above -- an EEC Strategy is a worthwhile venture. While it is most certainly an opportunity to save energy, it is also an excellent an non-partisan way to build community -- in itself a transformative gesture.

Resources:

US Dept. of Energy
Community Greening: How to Develop a Strategic Energy Plan www.nrel.gov/applying_technologies/pdfs/community_greening.pdf

US EPA
Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments www.epa.gov/region4/recycle/green-building-toolkit.pdf

Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute
Sustainable Community Development Code and Reform Initiative: http://law.du.edu/index.php/rmlui/sustainable-community-development-code-and-reform-initiative

US EPA
Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Urban and Suburban Zoning Codes: www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/essential_fixes.htm

Cascadia Green Building Council
Codes and Regulatory Research Publications
http://cascadiagbc.org/resources/research

Kathleen O'Brien is President of O'Brien & Company, a nationally respected green building consultancy founded in 1991. She is currently Principal-in-Charge for the firms planning, policy and programmatic work (including the Ellensburg project), and has been instrumental in the development of multiple sustainability strategies for government, non-profit, and private sector organizations. She served as an officer on the Cascadia Board of Directors in its early years and has been recognized by the organization as a Cascadia Fellow, a lifetime honorific. She is Editor of Building Capacity Blog.

Katie Spataro is Cascadia’s Research Director for Codes and Standards. Katie’s efforts to assist local governments with identifying obstacles and seeking pathways to support more sustainable development practices has assisted in the creation of policies, programs and code-related curriculum around the region. Katie heads up Cascadia’s Research Department which provides groundbreaking research and technical consulting services to help to further the adoption and understanding of the Living Building Challenge and other high performance policies, programs and standards.

Editors Note: More in depth treatment of the topic is in the fall issue of Cascadia Green Building Councils publication, Trim Tab here: http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/95a19dea#/95a19dea/1  

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Interview with SBCA and Built Green Santa Barbara’s Karin Perissinotto
Washington Business Alliance: A Sustainable Approach
Green Building Public Education: Writing to Make a Difference
How Can We Accelerate the Green Building Movement?