The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017 Copyright ©2017 BuildingGreen, Inc. All rights reserved.

Community-Scale Sustainability: Accelerating Change for People and Planet By working at the neighborhood scale, designers and developers can more dramatically improve environmental performance and social equity.

by James Wilson

The building industry has set ambitious goals for sustainability and resilience, and is recognizing that a building-by-building approach is not enough. At the same time there is an increasing focus on making healthy, vibrant, and resilient communities accessible to all.

“There’s certainly an urgency. I think people really understand that we’re the last generation that can make a difference if we act—and we can act and we need to act,” said Alicia Daniels Uhlig, director of Living Community Challenge + Policy at International Living Future Institute (ILFI).

Uhlig has worked as an architect for more than 25 years and took lead of the Living Community Challenge program last year. She told BuildingGreen that when she first learned of the position she couldn’t help thinking about how 2015 had been the hottest year on record (before being surpassed by 2016). “Personally I needed to effect more change at a faster rate,” she said. This motivat-ed her to shift to a position outside traditional architecture practice. And she says she doesn’t believe she is unique in this regard—many in the profession are feeling the same pressure to have a greater impact.

One effect of this is a trend towards a district-scale approach to sustainable development based on the idea that by combining resources and coordinating efforts, communities can meet performance goals much more quickly. And because this approach involves more stakeholders in community development, it could make the process more equitable.

Essentially, the way it works is a community forms a “sustainability district” to unite public- and

private-sector entities into an organization supported by a governance structure. This organization takes responsibility for central management tasks like the analysis of programs and goals, and the funding and monitoring of ongoing projects. It also facilitates communication between the community’s various stakehold-er groups, breaking down silos so that knowledge, information, and resources are shared easily. (For more details about how a “sustainability district” operates, see the “What Is a Sustainability District?” sidebar.)

What does this mean for the building industry? As focus shifts to district-scale efforts, building professionals may evolve the ways in which they work and adapt the services they provide. Designers especially may find that by engaging problems at a larger scale they’re able to generate better solutions.

Formerly Environmental Building News www.BuildingGreen.com Volume 26, Number 12 · December 2017

The Leading Source for Environmentally Responsible Design & Construction

TMThe BuildingGreen Report

Photo: Dllu. License: CC BY-SA 4.0.

Working at the neighborhood scale allows for accelerated implementation of sustainability solutions. And community level projects like the Capitol Hill EcoDistrict in Seattle are working to make sustainable development more equitable.

p. 2The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

The Right Scale: Neighborhoods as Innovation LabsRapid urbanization has affected cities especially at the neighborhood scale. “Since the bulk of urban growth is forecast to occur in communities of 100,000 to 250,000 people,” according to the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), “neighborhoods will be the fundamental units of urban change and innovation.”

The intermediate scale between that of the individual building and that of the city, the neighborhood scale of a sustainability district is ideal because

it is small enough to allow for rapid innovation yet large enough to have significant effects. Sustainability districts can act as living labs where strategies and tools are demonstrated and tested before being replicated and scaled for use in other districts, accelerating sustainable development across entire regions.

Frameworks + Certifications: Tools for Sustainable NeighborhoodsCommunities looking to take a neighborhood -scale approach to sustainable development can engage with a range of programs. These

The BuildingGreen Report Founding Editor · Alex Wilson

President, Editorial Director · Nadav Malin Managing Editor · Nancy Eve Cohen

Products & Materials Specialist · Brent EhrlichResearch Analyst · Paula Melton

Designer & Proofreader · Bets GreerProduction Assistant · Fran Bellin

Vice President, Technical Services · Peter YostChief Strategy Officer · Tristan Roberts

Design Director · Andrea LemonOutreach Director · Jerelyn Wilson

Operations Director · Angela BattistoAccounting & HR Director · Sarah Rice

Customer Support Manager · Charlotte SnyderWeb Developer · Ben Hewitt

Project Coordinator · Kelly Pope

Advisory BoardSteve Baczek, R.A., Reading, MA

Bob Berkebile, FAIA, Kansas City, MOArlene Blum, Ph.D., Berkeley, CAJohn Boecker, AIA, Harrisburg, PA

Terry Brennan, Rome, NYBill Browning, Hon. AIA, Washington, DC

Nancy Clanton, P.E., Boulder, CORaymond Cole, Ph.D., Vancouver, BC

David Eisenberg, Tucson, AZDrew George, P.E., San Diego, CA

Harry Gordon, FAIA, Washington, DCBruce King, P.E., San Rafael, CAJohn L. Knott, Jr., Charleston, SC

Sandra Mendler, AIA, San Francisco, CAGreg Norris, Ph.D., N. Berwick, ME

Russell Perry, FAIA, Washington, DCPeter Pfeiffer, FAIA, Austin, TXBill Reed, AIA, Arlington, MAJonathan Rose, Katonah, NY

Marc Rosenbaum, P.E., W. Tisbury, MAJohn Straube, Ph.D., P.Eng., Waterloo, ON

Michael Totten, Denver, COGail Vittori, Austin, TX

The BuildingGreen Report (ISSN 1062-3957), formerly Environmental Building News, is published monthly by BuildingGreen, Inc. TBGR does not accept advertising.

Copyright ©2017, BuildingGreen, Inc. All rights reserved. No material in this publication may be photocopied, electronically transmitted, or otherwise reproduced by any means without written permission from the Publisher. However, license to photocopy items for internal use or by institutions of higher education as part of collective works is granted.

DisclaimerEvery effort has been made to ensure that the information presented in TBGR is accurate and that design and construction details meet generally accepted standards. However, the information presented in TBGR, by itself, should not be relied on for final design, engineering, or building decisions.

Editorial & Subscription Office122 Birge St., Suite 30, Brattleboro, VT 05301

802-257-7300 · 802-257-7304 (fax) news@BuildingGreen.com · www.BuildingGreen.com

What Is a Sustainability District?A sustainability district unites public- and private-sector entities into an organization supported by a governance structure. This organization then takes responsibility for central management tasks like the analysis of programs and goals, and the funding and monitoring of ongoing projects. It also facilitates communication between the community’s various stakeholder groups, breaking down silos so that knowledge, information, and resources are shared easily.

In their report titled “Sustainability Districts For New York City: How Eco Districts and 2030 Districts Will Benefit NYC,” members of the NYC Emerging 2030 District and the NYC EcoDistricts Working Group define a sustainability district as “a neighborhood-scale approach to encouraging and enabling sustainability and resilience, encompassing environmental, economic, and social issues with both the present and future in mind.” It describes a district approach as one that involves various stakeholders, including residents, business owners, environmental and civic organizations, utilities, and municipal offices.

The NYC report identifies four overall strategies that sustainability districts, in general, employ:

• Aggregation: Sustainability districts gather together individual properties for economies of scale, They coordinate and streamline project management and funding, allowing smaller properties access to programs like combined contracting and bulk purchasing that are generally only available for large properties. As a district, individual property owners can more efficiently apply for things like grants and incentives.

• Integration: Sustainability districts bring together different programs within a community that have similar or overlapping goals. As part of a single district project, these programs can coordinate to find comprehensive solutions.

• Activation: Sustainability districts facilitate engagement of a broader set of stakeholders in a community, involving those who may be unaware of available resources.

• Amplification: A sustainability district is the ideal size for testing and developing strategies that can then be scaled and replicated, like experimental energy or zoning regulations, and district energy, water, and waste infrastructure.

Sustainability districts are not intended to be standalone initiatives. They can bring together separate programs and resources into a coordinated effort to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness.

The report offers the example of a proposed deep energy retrofit project in New York in which a sustainability district could aggregate several existing buildings to meet the goals of the city’s “80x50” climate plan and the NYC Carbon Challenge. As a district, the effort could access all kinds of resources, including:

• Financing from the NYC Energy Efficiency Corporation and the NYC Retrofit Accelerator

• Supplemental funds from the NY State Energy Research and Development Authority

• Incentives from the local utility companies

• Technical support from organizations like the Building Performance Lab and the Building Energy Exchange

p. 3The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

programs share many things in common, but there are also distinctive aspects to each. Though most involve a certification standard, they can also serve as useful frameworks for communities not intending to pursue certification.

Here we offer a brief introduction to four programs: EcoDistricts, 2030 Districts, Living Community Challenge, and LEED for Communities. If you’re looking for a quick rundown and comparison of existing neighborhood-scale programs, including information regarding the scope, process, and requirements of each, see Certified Communities: When Greening Neighborhoods One Building at a Time Isn’t Enough.

EcoDistricts

The foundation of the EcoDistricts program is the EcoDistricts Protocol, a tool to guide communities as they create a detailed roadmap for planning, designing, financing, delivering, and monitoring an EcoDistrict.

Communities establish EcoDistricts to support a range of neighborhood-scale projects that increase performance across the full spectrum of sustainability. Some examples of potential projects include:

• District energy and water management

• Urban agriculture or community gardens

• Public art installations

The Protocol supports a highly flexible process so that it can be applied to a wide range of different communities and project types, whether it’s a major brownfield redevelopment, a campus, or neighborhood revitalization.

Naomi Cole, director of certification + innovation at EcoDistricts, explained that in developing the Protocol, the organization strove for a balance between flexibility and comprehensive rigor. “We’ve tried to find that sweet spot where this is a useful and beneficial framework that helps inform a community and ensure that there aren’t any gaps, while at the same time allowing it to really be owned by the community,” she said, emphasizing the program’s focus on a grassroots process of sustainable development that is also “placed-based”—responsive to the cultural and environmental surroundings.

To give an example, Cole references the Equity Imperative. The program does not prescribe any specific strategy for achieving equity but projects must address equity from an operational standpoint. This includes the “procedural equity” of how people are engaged, the “structural equity” of how decisions are made, and the “distributional equity” of how benefits and burdens are shared.

The Equity Imperative is just one example of how equity is “built into every step” of the EcoDistricts program. “It’s not just about the kind of environmental performance of the climate or carbon impact that you get with like a 2030 District,” said Cole, “but it’s really about how this work is done in a just and equitable way and an inclusive way that reflects the community.”

Each EcoDistrict develops its own set of goals during organization and assessment phases. The district then develops projects to address these goals along with associated metrics for measuring the performance of each, which will be tracked on an ongoing basis during a monitoring phase. Communities seeking certification (through EcoDistricts Certified) follow this same basic process but are required to submit specific documentation related to each step for third-party verification.

Capitol Hill EcoDistrict: a leading model for equitable development

One of the earliest EcoDistricts is the Capitol Hill EcoDistrict in Seattle. Led by Capitol Hill Housing, a community development corporation (CDC) and public development authority, the EcoDistrict got started with initial funding support from the Bullitt Foundation, which saw Capitol Hill as an ideal place to establish an EcoDistrict because of its dense population, active commercial sector, and high level of transit investment, including a new light rail station.

How Are Sustainability Districts Funded?Financing is a challenge for any sustainability district. Though each district may develop unique methods of funding its projects, depending on its particular governance structure and location, there are some common fundraising strategies available to all, including:

• Cost-sharing: For example, multiple properties, programs, or organizations within a district might split the cost of resources or projects that address common goals.

• Donations: Districts might choose to set up a way for community stake-holders to donate money in support of different projects. For example, through a crowd-funding platform or with a targeted fundraising drive.

• Grants: Dist ric ts may apply for grant funding from public and private organizations that support sustainable development or neighborhood revitalization projects.

• Sponsorships: Districts may receive on-going financial support from organizations like a charitable foundation that has a mission to promote sustainable development or environmental protection.

Subsidies and Incentives: District projects, especially those related to efficiency and renewable energy, may be eligible for various local and state government subsidy funds and incentive programs. [See the Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy (DSIRE).]

Photo courtesy of Capitol Hill EcoDistrict

By implementing projects like community solar installations, the Capitol Hill EcoDistrict is working to provide the benefits of solar to more people in the neighborhood, including affordable housing residents.

p. 4The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

The district developed out of an initial study of the neighborhood, conducted by GGLO, a local design firm. Joel Sisolak, senior director of sustainability + planning at Capitol Hill Housing told BuildingGreen, “We contracted GGLO to do essentially an asset assessment of the neighbor-hood, to look at what might be some of the sustainability challenges and what might be some strategies for addressing those challenges.” Sisolak said there was a focus on identifying opportunities offered by the redevelopment happening around the light rail station.

GGLO produced a report that sparked the formation of a steering committee—which includes institutions, developers, businesses, residents, community activists, and the city—to define a vision and specific goals for the district. Once the neighborhood’s priorities had been established, they began to develop projects to address these priorities.

One key project was the development of a set of performance metrics called the Capitol Hill EcoDistrict Index. According to Sisolak, the Index originally focused on environmental sustainability but evolved to be much more holistic and centered around equity, in part as a reflection of what Capitol Hill Housing is. “Capitol Hill Housing, like CDCs around the country, evolved out of the civil rights movement,” said Sisolak, “and our

focus is really standing and working alongside low-income people.”

Sisolak describes an “equity screening tool” that makes equity a priority in all of the district’s projects. For example, Sisolak points to the work the district has done to improve transit access. “If we can improve transit access for low-income people, we’re improving mobil-ity and transit access for everybody,” he says.

The Capitol Hill Renter Initiative is another

example. Sisolak explained that more than 80% of the residents of Capitol Hill are renters and that historically power in the neighborhood has rested more with property owners. “We real-ly wanted to find a way to get renters more engaged in influencing both public and private processes and de-velopment in the neighborhood. “The goal is to really bring a grassroots balance to the ‘grasstops’ approach of the EcoDistricts steering committee,” Sisolak said. [“Grasstops” advocacy is led by community stakeholders with a high level of influence, like property owners and those in decision-making roles at institutions or government agencies.]

In addition to helping form a citywide renters’ commission—the first of its kind in the country—the Renter Initiative is also working on things like passing “mandatory housing affordability” zoning changes, and improving pedestrian and bicycle safety through outreach around protected bike lanes.

2030 Districts

While EcoDistricts address the full spectrum of sustainability goals, 2030 Districts focus on a narrower set of priorities, namely those outlined by the 2030 Challenge for Planning, which include goals for reducing fossil-fuel energy consumption, water

consumption, and CO2 emissions from transportation.

The 2030 Districts program does not involve a rating system but is based on the premise that buildings in a neighbor hood can form a district to meet, collectively, the goals of the Architecture 2030 Challenge.

Dave Low, a liaison for the 2030 Districts Network, explained that the impetus for the program was the passing of the benchmarking ordinance in Seattle. “When that happened we came together in the building industry community. Rather than all of us trying to figure out what the heck to do and how to address this individually, why don’t we sit down as a group and figure it out,” he said. The group, led by building owners and managers, worked for a year and eventually came up with the 2030 District concept as a way to cooperatively address both the local benchmarking law and the 2030 Challenge.

Low told BuildingGreen, “For this to really make a difference, we really felt like we needed to have these measurable goals, so that’s why we went to Architecture 2030.” And soon after the first 2030 District was established in Seattle, several other cities came to them wanting to start their own—which led to the creation of the official nationwide program.

The 2030 Districts program is generally intended for denser urban areas—like central business districts—that have a mix of commercial and residential buildings, a concentration

Photo courtesy of Alex Garland Photography

The Capitol Hill EcoDistrict, serving a neighborhood comprised of 80% renters, launched the Capitol Hill Renter Initiative to engage and involve renters across the community. A Renter Summit brought together hundreds of renters and local officials to discuss priorities and goals for the community.

Image: 2015 2030, Inc. / Architecture 2030

Property owners and managers in a neighborhood may form a 2030 District to collaborate, share resources, and collectively meet 2030 Challenge goals.

p. 5The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

of resources, and multiple properties that are owned or managed by the same entity. This allows for rapid implementation of efficiency practices.

Launching a 2030 District requires committed participation of at least ten owners or managers, or 10% of the commercial building space, or a total 10 million square feet within a designated boundary (each district draws its own boundary).

Low explains that each of the existing 2030 Districts was established and operates a bit differently. For example, the Pittsburgh district is run as a program of the local USGBC chapter there, while the Albuquerque, New Mexico district is run through the downtown Business Improvement District, and the Cleveland and Seattle districts each formed their own nonprofit organizations.

2030 Districts across the country together make up the 2030 Districts Network, which “coordinates resources, best practices, and collaboration among all the districts,” according to Low. This includes the development of resources that each district can tap into, including, for example, a cooperative purchasing program for energy-efficient products. District membership also gives

building owners, property managers, and developers access to services like:

• Assessment of current building performance relative to 2030 District goals

• Anonymous benchmarking against local peer buildings

• Training on tools and best practices

In addition to resources available through the national network, each district develops its own programs. According to Low, a lot of districts focus first on education. The Pittsburgh district, for example, runs a monthly program to educate building owners about current technologies and strategies for reducing energy and water use.

There are three types of members in a 2030 District: property owners & managers, services stakeholders (architects, engineers, builders, etc.), and community stakeholders (civic institutions, neighborhood organizations, etc.). However, the private-sector partners, not government entities, take the lead.

“That’s been one of the keys to the successes is that it’s private-sector led,” said Low, “so developers, managers, and owners don’t feel like this is something the city is telling them they have to do. This is about them coming up with solutions that are helpful to them. It’s all about trying to help them develop tools to address market realities.”

The focus of 2030 Districts is really on making the business case for urban sustainability, with an emphasis on economic development. Low points to one of the program’s biggest successes, in Seattle. “The city has now put incentives into their building codes based on recommendations from the Seattle 2030 District,” he said. For example, developers are eligible for priority permitting if they join the District and commit to meeting the goals. “That’s a really important financial, tangible benefit to a developer,” said Low.

Meeting the 2030 Challenge in NYC

The New York City 2030 District is an “emerging” district, which means it is seeking a critical mass of commitments from property owners and managers before finalizing a formal organizational structure.

The district includes areas of both downtown Brooklyn and downtown Manhattan, and the initial area of focus is centered on Brooklyn Community District 2. Architect Haym Gross, founding member of the NYC 2030 District Committee, explained that the process of establishing a district in New York has been different compared to other cities in terms of carving out turf. He explains that the city is a very diverse and crowded field. There are many different public and private programs—including arts, environmental, and real estate groups—each trying to stake out territory.

Despite this great number of organizations working on some aspect of sustainability or resilience, the exploratory committee, according to Gross, found there was no group “independent of either government or a corporate interest that is specifically geared toward facilitation of projects.” This is the role the 2030 District plans to fill. Gross said, “We’re looking to do economies of scale, we’re looking to do a very open form of collaboration, we’re looking to get finance and technology and design professions and the academic world and the policy people together to push this forward at a much faster rate, both in terms of innovation, but also in terms of generating projects that have some form of aggregated value.”

One of the district’s initial projects is to collaborate with Solar One to run a Solarize NYC campaign with a grant from the NYC Solar Partnership. The project will aggregate building owners interested in installing solar panels to collectively negotiate competitive pricing, lowering the cost for each.

Image: NYC Emerging 2030 District / NYC EcoDistricts Working Group

A report by the NYC Emerging 2030 District and the NYC EcoDistricts Working Group evaluates how district-scale sustainability programs could be implemented in New York City.

p. 6The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

Living Community Challenge

The Living Community Challenge (LCC) is essentially the Living Building Challenge (LBC) scaled up and applied to entire neighbor-hoods. The same basic goals and requirements apply. To earn LCC certification, a community must achieve net-positive energy and water performance, but this can be distributed, concentrated, and/or averaged throughout the community. And, as with the LBC, full LCC certification is based on 12 months of actual performance, and projects can alternatively choose to pursue a Petal certification.

These progressive goals and emphasis on performance are about closing the gap between what’s currently considered standard practice and what the ideal would be. Uhlig told BuildingGreen, “It’s not just that you’re measuring, and that you’re x percent better, but that [you’re achieving] net positive performance on every level. It’s that combination of not just measuring the data but having the right goals.”

Like the LBC, the LCC is organized around 7 “Petals” and 20 “Imperatives.” Uhlig explained that 16 of the 20 Imperatives for the LCC have the same name as those in LBC and are based on the same principles but tailored for the com-munity scale. The four Imperatives unique to the community scale are: Healthy Neighborhood Design, Resilient Community Connection,

Living Materials Plan, and Universal Access to Community Services.

The LCC certification process is similar to that of the LBC, with the addition of intermediate phases focused on the development of a Vision Plan and Masterplan. These involve estab-lishing a shared idea of what’s good for the community and creating a detailed roadmap for success. (More informa-tion about each step of the certification process is available in a recently published handbook. See also: New Handbook Demystifies the Living Community Challenge.)

These planning phases of the program can be really powerful in themselves by helping a community find ways to take action. Uhlig notes that most communities—whether it’s a college campus, neighborhood, or master planned development—have a number of goals and plans for meeting them. A city may have a different initiative each for things like carbon reduction, livability, and resilience. “What we’re hearing from the teams engaging with the Living Community Challenge is that they see it as an overarching implementation tool that can help unite all of these plans,” said Uhlig.

But regardless of the specific place and its particular plans, the goal is to

have the community as involved as possible. Though the LCC sets specific performance goals, it is not meant to prescribe how each community reaches those goals. The strat-egies used should be fully informed by the community. “We talk a lot about the genius of the community—how they think it’s best to get to that goal of perfor-mance,” said Uhlig.

In addition to the framework that the LCC certification process provides, the program has also developed a number of tools that can be used by any community working on sustainable development. One example is the Living Community Patterns, which, explained Uhlig, “build off Christopher Alexander’s A Pattern Language, distilling the Imperatives into themes of patterns.” These were developed through the program’s work with the San Francisco planning department, which was interested in creating a variety of patterns that could be incorporated in various neighborhoods.

Algiers Village: a rural Living Community?

Algiers Village is a rural community in Guilford, Vermont. Once a very vibrant place, the village, like many others throughout the region, had fallen into decline over a period of decades. Then, in 2004, a group of residents gathered to form an organization, Friends of Algiers Village, Inc. (FAV), with the mission “to stabilize and increase the economic and environmental vitality of the village.” (Disclosure: BuildingGreen is technical consultant for this project.)

Now, together with three other local nonprofit organizations, FAV is working with the regional planning commission to explore the possibility of pursuing Living Community Challenge certification. In fact, it was the commission’s proposal that the

Image: ILFI

Living Community Challenge projects proceed through planning and implementation phases and have the option of pursuing Zero Energy, Petal, or full Living certification.

Photo courtesy of Williams College

Williams College, a registered Living Community Challenge project, is using the program as a framework to plan future development of its campus in Williamstown, Massachusetts.

p. 7The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

Village engage with the LCC program that caused the four groups to come together for the first time behind a single effort. Gary Swindler, president of FAV, told BuildingGreen, “Algiers is a very small community, but it got us actually in the same room at the same time talking about our wishes and desires, and barriers and frustrations.” Very quickly, the different groups realized they all wanted a lot of the same things for the community.

Susan McMahon, associate director of Windham Regional Commission, explained that one of the first steps was to go through each of the LCC Petals to determine the feasibility of meeting the requirements. “Right now, we’re very much in a phase one—looking if this is possible,” said McMahon, “but regardless, it still works very well for the community because they at least get to look at what is possible in the community even if they don’t go any further than this.”

Soon after the four development groups first met to discuss a “wish list” of shared goals, they brought the wider community into the process with a public meeting to review these goals. “And actually it was also a way to voice concerns about the whole process,” Swindler said, adding that Guilford, like any town, has a lot of naysayers.

The group recognizes how crucial it is to clearly explain what the LCC is and what it will mean for future development to a community that’s

largely unfamiliar with such programs. “That’s been one of our chal-lenges is communicat-ing this kind of more urban concept on a rural level,” said McMahon. “We’re trying to do the work and at the same time trying to explain it,” she said, adding that it would be helpful if the program used terms that are less jargony and more accessible to laypeople.

Though the village is still very early in the process, Swindler said that it’s been a very healthy process of community develop-ment. “LCC is pie in the sky, it’s the umbrella, it’s kind of what’s driving this,” he says, “but really the reality, the feet-on-the-ground effort, is a very tangible community conversation leading to hopefully a well conceived vision for how Algiers could respond to all the current and future challenges.”

Thus far the effort is being financed with funds from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfields program—which allows for a certain percentage of granted money to be used for area-wide planning projects—and from the state’s Clean Energy Development Fund.

LEED for Communities

Currently in pilot phase, LEED for Communities is a new USGBC program to support district-scale sustainable development. (LEED for Communities is paired with the LEED for Cities program. The two programs have the same requirements for certification. See LEED to Certify Entire Communities, Cities.)

Casey Studhalter, project manager at USGBC explained how this new rating system differs from the LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) system. “The way that LEED has a BD+C rating system for new construction, providing the sort of prescriptive strategies needed

during that design and construction phase, but then there’s also an O+M rating system for the ongoing life of the building—I think that LEED-ND and LEED for Cities or Communities serves that similar need,” he said.

And what sets LEED for Communities apart from other district-scale programs is its singular emphasis on measurable outcomes over process. “Our program is the only program that is exclusively focused on performance,” said Roger Platt, senior vice president of strategic planning, USGBC.

Communities seeking LEED for Communities certification use USGBC’s online Arc platform to collect and submit specific metrics related to a holistic set of sustain-ability categories. Communities then implement strategies to improve performance across categories. Using the analytic capabilities of the Arc tool, communities can evaluate the effectiveness of different strategies as well as identify synergies between strategies.

This commitment to performance is to build credibility, according to Platt. One of the goals of the program, he explains, is to develop “enough

Photo: Windham & Windsor Housing Trust

Part of the development efforts in Algiers Village include providing additional affordable housing units.

Image: Windham Regional Commission

Algiers Village, Vermont, is developing a Living Community Challenge Vision Plan, which includes a study of how the community might use solar power to help meet the requirements of the Energy Petal.

p. 8The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

performance data through Arc that when we say that a city designed in this fashion is more likely to accomplish high performance, we know what we’re talking about—that we actually have some data to support the correlation between certain designs and certain levels of performance.”

The foundational belief of the program is that there is a real connection between measurement and higher levels of performance. “That was our experience very dramatically with the GRESB product we have,” said Platt, referring to the Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark, a program for assessing the sustainability performance of real estate portfolios. “All kinds of companies, all else being equal, seemed to improve simply by the act of measuring,” he says.

LEED for Communities in South Korea: Songdo International Business District

This focus on data is evident in places like Songdo International Business District (IBD) in Incheon, South Korea, a master planned private development that was designed from the ground up to be a “smart” and sustainable city.

The district recently earned a LEED for Communities Precertification, which means it has created an approved planning “roadmap” describing the district’s goals, stakeholders, governance structure, and methods for tracking key performance metrics.

Ashok Raiji, principal at Arup, says that the data technology of “smart cities” like Songdo will be what drives

efficiency in the future. He explains that smart cities essentially use a lot of collected data that is specific to that par-ticular city to help the people who run it make good, informed deci-sions about operations.

Songdo is unique in that most of it (60%) is owned by a single developer, Gale In-ternational. Gale, in a

public-private partnership with the Incheon city government, has led the development of the district. And this model has allowed for a highly effective, integrated implementation of sustainable strategies like a pneumatic waste removal system, a district co-generation plant, and “ubiquitous” sensing and control technology.

Raiji explains that in Songdo, all the operational systems were brought together into “one smart system that’s looking at everything, that is exchanging very relevant and real-time information from one system to the other.” For example, the city is able to look at things like traffic

and, using predictive analytics, can predict when congestion will happen and respond intelligently to manage a traffic jam that hasn’t even happened yet.

In its extensive use of data to drive operational decisions, Songdo seems to be tailor-made for the LEED for Communities program with its primary emphasis on measurement. Though the district had originally intended to achieve LEED-ND certification for the entire district, due to certain requirements of that system, particularly those pertaining to public access, it was not possible. Instead, several smaller individual sections within the district are pursuing LEED-ND certification while the district as a whole pursues LEED for Communities certification.

Tom Murcott, executive vice president at Gale International, told BuildingGreen, “All along we’d been pushing the USGBC to do what we sort of termed for a while ‘LEED for urban development’—and the concept of having a new standard that looked at things more holistically and wasn’t so prescriptive.”

Images: Arc Skoru Inc. / USGBC

Communities seeking LEED for Communities or LEED for Cities certification use the Arc online reporting tool to collect and analyze metrics for a holistic range of sustainability categories.

The Songdo International Business District in Incheon, South Korea, is being developed from the ground up as a sustainable city and recently earned a LEED for Communities Precertification. It contains 22 million square feet of LEED-certified space, a pneumatic waste disposal system, and a district co-generation plant.

p. 9The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

ChallengesWhichever program a community uses to guide sustainable development, there are challenges that are common to them all.

For any of these programs to really be effective in supporting a vibrant, sustainable community, the unique qualities and particular priorities of that community must be identified. And in order for a community to move forward with any of these programs, consensus about goals must be reached.

But this can be a challenge in existing communities with multiple, diverse groups of property owners and stakeholders, each of which may have varying levels of interest and different ideas about how the neighborhood should be developed.

Several people told BuildingGreen that when communicating with community members it is important to avoid jargon that might alienate people or feel too hierarchical. Instead, many suggest speaking directly to people about how development projects will affect them personally.

Another challenge relates to governance. Platt, in speaking about LEED for Communities, explained that it is “important to make sure that you have a solid governance structure that you can rely on—an entity that represents the various stakeholders in such a way that they can commit to these goals and they can coordinate their communications back.” Platt noted that it’s a little more straight-forward at the city scale when the city is the coordinating authority. But at the district level, when you have multiple owners and organizations, you need a strong governing body to bring these all into concerted action.

Sustainability Districts: Strategies for SuccessWhichever program a community chooses to guide neighborhood-scale sustainable development, there are some essential strategies that can help any project succeed.

Core ValuesPlace-based Process: Sensitivity to a community’s unique cultural and environmental context is important in developing projects that respond to the actual needs and priorities of a place. A development process guided by the identity of the community will generate the most appropriate and effective strategies. Engaging local expertise can help projects discover the best strategies for a particular community.

Social Equity: By grounding all of its operations and activities in equity, a district can maximize its impact. By attending to the most vulnerable populations within the community, the district can ensure that it is improv-ing conditions for all. An equitable process also promotes community buy-in and participation.

Process + Outcomes: It is important for each district to find the right balance between a focus on process and a focus on goals. Depending on its particular qualities, a district may choose to establish specific performance goals or emphasize continuous, incremental improvement instead. Either way, it is critical that performance be measured on an ongoing basis. Depending on its particular goals and priorities, a district may choose to prescribe specific strategies or focus instead on establishing a flexible framework to support development of custom solutions. In either case, maintaining rigor in the process will be important to achieving meaningful impact.

OrganizationCommunity of Practice: Successful districts foster a “community of practice” by facilitating collaborative relationships with and among local service providers, public agencies, and advocacy groups.

Governance: A strong governance structure is critical to the success of any district. A well-organized decision-making body that operates transparently can be highly effective at facilitating coordination between a district’s different programs and projects. A central steering committee can also more efficiently handle administrative tasks—like performance tracking, communications, and fundraising—for all district stakeholders.

Committed Sponsor: Districts supported by devoted “backbone” organizations are often highly successful. For example, community development corporations, which focus on social equity, community organizing, and affordable housing development, are a natural fit for sustainability districts.

StakeholdersCommunity Engagement: The more involved the community is, the better. Districts that have gained the support and participation of a diverse range of community stakeholders are likely to develop solutions that have wide appeal. And the more aware and informed a community is, the easier it will be to craft a collective vision and achieve consensus.

Communication: In communicating with community stakeholders it is important to avoid jargon or language that feels top-down. A highly effective way of informing community members is to tell them how development projects will directly affect them. A relatable, bottom-up approach is the best way to share ideas about what’s possible in a neighborhood.

Trust: Gaining community buy-in is easier the more accountable and credible the district’s governing body is. Maintaining transparency and openness are essential for gaining the public’s trust. One strategy for establishing legitimacy is to register with an established program or rating system administered by a recognized third-party organization.

Diverse Participation: The involvement of both grassroots organizers and high-level community influencers in a district not only maintains an equitable and diverse balance, it also increases the range and variety of projects a district can implement. Successful districts also involve a good mix of both public and private partners. This supports a district’s ability to develop projects informed by both policy and economics.

FinancingEconomic Feasibility: Successful districts are able to gain the full investment and support of private sector partners by developing strategies and projects that are aligned with market realities. An important task of any district is to make the business case for green and socially responsible development.

Diverse Funding: Districts that are able to secure financial support from a variety of sources will be more adaptable and resilient. A robust funding strategy is critical to success. A district may prioritize devoting a portion of its full-time capacity to fundraising efforts.

p. 10The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

Financing projects is another challenge regardless of the particular program a community uses. A sustainability district’s fundraising strategies will depend on its governance structure, and on the resources and opportunities available in its location. For example, a district might elicit donations through a crowd-funding platform, or receive financial support through sponsorships and grants offered by public and private organizations that focus on advancing sustainable development. (See the “How Are Sustainability Districts Funded?” sidebar above for more information.)

The Future of Sustainable Development and DesignCole’s hope for the EcoDistricts certification standard is that it really drives market transformation. “Much like LEED, in 10 or 15 years, this type of equitable, sustainable development will be almost standard practice or status quo and built into RFPs [requests for proposals] that are released by redevelopment agencies and public authorities,” she said.

“I would hope that, 20 years from now, there’s a whole host of businesses that have sustainable neighborhood development built into their service offerings,” Cole said. She added that these businesses would need to “really understand what that means from an engagement standpoint and an equity standpoint and a districts-systems perspective and a community development perspective that’s beyond the technical green building strategy solutions.”

Evolving practice: collaborative leadership

As the market changes and focus shifts to the community level, it will require building professionals to embrace more cooperative ways of working. Competitors may become collaborators.

“We very much look at our work as building a community of practice,” said Cole. Established EcoDistricts

are gathered into cohorts so that knowledge and information is shared among them. Cole told BuildingGreen, “Even the EcoDistricts that have been at this the longest have said there’s really value in having this sense of community and there are things to learn from the newer EcoDistricts.”

Like any community-based planning efforts involving a wide array of different participants, establishing and maintaining a sustainability district needs good facilitators—people who have strong skills in communication, outreach, and project management. Building professionals who have experience leading or facilitating integrative design processes at the building scale may naturally evolve to fill a similar role at the neighborhood scale. In many ways, that’s what sustainability districts are about—taking the concept of integrative process to the next level, where the collaborating stakeholders include entire project teams, developers, building managers and property owners, city agencies, community groups, etc.

Place-based work

In order to better serve the localized projects of a sustainability district, building professionals may develop

practices that are much more place-based. Fundamentally this means becoming more involved in and informed about the local community.

Another aspect of a place-based practice may be a greater understanding of how each single project interacts with a larger network of built infrastructure and natural systems. According to Uhlig, there is an increased awareness among architects of how individual sites are part of a larger ecosystem and a greater emphasis on the responsibilities that a site has to the larger ecosystem. The LCC uses the metaphor of the forest. “It’s less about the individual organism; it’s more about the ecosystem and how the ecosystem is working and thriving together,” said Uhlig.

Developer-driven sustainability

Developers play a major role in district- scale sustainability efforts and some seem to be increasingly willing to commit to such projects. “I think one of the things that’s been really exciting and inspiring to me is working with developers who see value in this,” said Cole. She says more developers are realizing that making a larger upfront investment to take a non-traditional approach that

Photo courtesy of Alex Garland Photography

The Capitol Hill Garage Sale Day is an example of the projects that the Capitol Hill EcoDistrict helps to organize. The community event promotes recycling and social interaction.

p. 11The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

involves the community is the right way to gain support.

And in a growing number of cases, according to Platt, it is the developers who are the ones behind the scenes in communities encouraging different groups to organize around a district-scale approach. Developers planning to be long-term investors in a community understand the economic benefits of sustainable development. “Sometimes there is a developer who’s eager to develop in a district or region and views engagement with LEED for Communities as one way to get on the record the community’s commitment to long-term environmental performance,” said Platt.

Scaling up impact

Uhlig shares that, in her previous position at GGLO, when she first started with the firm it was pursuing its first LEED project. But over time the firm broadened its thinking in an effort to get to scale, and has been involved in a number of different projects that are not typical within

traditional architecture practice. For example, the firm has worked with Seattle on its sea level rise adaptation planning and its climate action plan. “I think there are a lot of different ways within a traditional practice that you can scale up for that maximum impact,” said Uhlig.

Overall, community-based sustainable development could provide building professionals with a refreshed sense of purpose and energy. Swindler, who works as an energy consultant, said about exploring the LCC in Algiers Village, “From a personal level it’s kind of a vocational dream to be able to be involved in a really active and functioning Living Community. I’m not trying to get too wide-eyed about the potential, but it’s definitely helping keep me motivated for the process.”

For more information

EcoDistricts ecodistricts.org

2030 Districts Network 2030districts.org

International Living Future Institute living-future.org/lcc

US Green Building Council new.usgbc.org/cert-guide/ cities-communities

NEWS ANALYSIS

Denver Votes Green Thumbs Up for Green Roofs A city suffering from ozone pollution and the heat-island effect approves a ballot measure requiring green roofs.

by Nancy Eve Cohen

More than half of the voters in Denver approved a ballot initiative in November requiring new buildings 25,000 square feet or larger to build green roofs or roofs that combine vegetation and solar arrays. The rules also apply when additions are built that expand a building to 25,000 square feet or more, and to existing buildings of that size when they are replacing a roof.

The unlikely leader of the initiative is a 31-year-old manager of a Red Robin Gourmet Burgers restaurant named Brandon Rietheimer, who has never done environmental organizing before.

Rietheimer was inspired to make a difference after the presidential election. “Bernie’s message really resonated,” he recalled, explaining Bernie Sanders’ call to action: “’Get active locally.’ I took that to heart.”

Rietheimer thought about what he could do to improve the environment

Photo courtesy of Bill Wright Photography

Capitol Hill Housing's 12th Avenue Arts building is a mixed-use development that includes 88 affordable apartments as well as theaters, local retail, a community meeting room, and nonprofit office space. It is also part of the Capitol Hill Arts District project to both preserve the neighborhood's cultural identity and leverage the arts as a means to achieve community goals.

Photo: Andy Creath

A green roof on top of the Community College of Denver.

p. 12The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

in Denver. He points out the city suffers from ozone pollution, polluted waterways, and the heat-island effect. “I found the best way to address all those issues,” he said, “is green roofs.”

He and about 80 other volunteers gathered 8,000 signatures for a petition to get the initiative on the ballot. “It was really close,” he said. “We were out there up until the very last minute of the very last day.”

Once the green roof initiative got on the ballot, the volunteers faced another challenge. A group of Denver businesses and real estate developers called Citizens for a Responsible Denver raised nearly $260,000 to pay for television and radio ads to try to convince people to vote against it. That compared to $21,000 raised by backers of the initiative.

Developers oppose the mandate, proponents say it’s essential

Kathie Barstnar co-chairs Citizens for a Responsible Denver and is executive director of NAIOP Colorado, the state’s commercial real estate development association. She said the problem with the green roof requirement is “mandating that it be on every building, rather than allowing owners to determine whether or not it really works for their particular project.” She adds a second

problem is that “it applies to existing buildings with very little ability to exempt out.”

But Rietheimer said the mandate is key. “Having one green roof here and there is great for a building,” he said, “but it doesn’t really do a lot for the city.”

Denver has the third worst urban heat-island effect in the United States, averaging 4.9ºF hotter over the summer in the city compared to the surrounding areas—driving up cooling costs.

The heat-island effect is when a city is hotter than nearby rural areas. It’s caused by impermeable surfaces like roads, parking lots, and dark rooftops that absorb and retain heat.

“When we replace a dark tar roof with a green roof, we remove a source of heat from the outside,” said Steven Peck, founder and president of Green Roofs for Healthy Cities. “Put a green roof on, and not only does it take the heat source away, it actually has a net cooling effect.”

The idea behind the initiative is that green roofs would cool the city as a whole and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by swapping out the heat-absorbing black roofs for lush gardens or solar energy arrays.

On green roofs, the plants and the growing medium (soil isn’t used, but instead an engineered mix of materials) retain moisture and take the heat out of the air through evapotranspiration, a process similar to how our bodies cool down when we sweat. (For more on green roof soil, see For a Low-Maintenance Green Roof, Give Plants Better Soil.)

Green roofs also slow down the flow of storm water and filter pollutants out of the air.

Peck’s group, Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, along with the Green Infrastructure Foundation, studied the costs and benefits of Denver’s green roof ballot initiative. The analysis assumes all the work done would be green roofs, not solar.

The study found that capital and maintenance costs would be significant; but over a 40-year period, energy savings and other benefits would more than defray these expenses.

Barstnar said the added construction and maintenance costs, plus possible higher insurance costs, mean some development projects “may not go forward.” And some existing buildings may choose to patch roofs, rather than replace them with green roofs.

Barstnar adds, the initiative didn’t “address the ability to do white roofs,” which she says would be a better fit for some existing buildings and is less costly. (For more on white roofs, see Are Cool Roofs Green? The Answer’s Not Black and White.)

When the ordinance goes into effect on January 1, Denver will join San Francisco and Toronto, which have green roof requirements for some new buildings.

The Denver City Council could still amend or appeal the ordinance, but it would need a two-thirds vote. Rietheimer says he’s open to amending the ordinance to clarify the rules for existing buildings.

Photo: courtesy Steven W. Peck, GRP, Founder and President, GRHC

Green roof atop the Denver Botanic Gardens, with more than 100 species of native plants.

p. 13The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

More on green roofs

Green Roofs: Using Roofs for More Than Keeping Dry

Are Cool Roofs Green? The Answer’s Not Black and White

For a Low-Maintenance Green Roof, Give Plants Better Soil

New Standard for Green Roof Membranes

ASTM Approves Green Roof Standards

For more information

Denver Green Roof Initiative

Citizens for a Responsible Denver

Study on Denver’s Green Roof Initiative

Green Infrastructure Foundation

Green Roofs for Healthy Cities

Waste Not Want Not: NYC Zero Waste Design Guidelines If we can reduce waste here, we can do it anywhere.

by Nancy Eve Cohen

Waste is a design flaw.

That’s the thinking behind the Zero Waste Design Guidelines, recently issued by the NYC chapter of the American Institute of Architects.

The guidelines recommend a set of best practices for designing buildings, streets, and neighborhoods to reduce the amount of material that ends up in landfills. Designers, developers, and sustainability and waste experts worked together to create them.

The focus is on the nation’s biggest city, New York, where the Department of Sanitation collected, on average, 12,550 tons of waste every day last year. Only 18.9% was recycled, reused, or composted, as illustrated by this graphic from the Zero Waste Design Guidelines, courtesy of Center for Architecture.

Designing for waste is a new field

“It was kind of a revelation to work with waste,” said Clare Miflin, an associate principle with Kiss+Cathcart, Architects, who spearheaded the guideline effort. “Not much has been done. So, there is so much opportunity to improve things.”

The guidelines are being released as the city tackles its ambitious goal of sending zero waste to landfills by 2030. Although the focus of the guidelines is New York City, the authors say they can be applied to other places as well.

A lot of the thinking behind the guidelines is focused on design that makes it easy for people to do the right thing as efficiently and effortlessly as possible. They tackle the challenges of storing, separating, and collecting waste—including trash, recyclables, textiles and organic waste—on construction sites and in residential and commercial buildings.

A waste like no other

Organic waste makes up about one-third of the trash in New York City and presents specific challenges.

“It’s not the same as plastic bottles that can stay in a trash room for a few days until the super can come collect them,” explained Miflin. “Organic waste needs to be collected every day. So, we have to change our buildings if we want to collect that.”

Miflin says it should be equally convenient to dispose in one location all of the waste we generate every day, rather than having to haul organics to the basement, for example. In many buildings, it’s far easier to throw trash out than to recycle or compost.

“If you have all the bins together, people are more likely to separate stuff if they don’t have to take one thing to a more inconvenient location.”

By code, new, larger residential buildings in NYC must have recycling and trash disposal on every floor. The guidelines recommend that in low-service buildings, where the bins aren’t emptied each day, designers plan to have bins for each waste stream in one central location for the entire building. That way, it would be equally convenient to dispose of everything.

“It makes it difficult if you have to put it in a lot of different places,” said Miflin.

One of the first steps during the design process is to figure out the amount of waste a building might produce. The guidelines include an online calculator that estimates the amount of trash, recycling, organics, and textiles a building might generate.Photo: Zero Waste Design Guidelines Team

Recycling on Cedar Street in the Financial District of New York City.

Photo: Zero Waste Design Guidelines Team

Recycling bags on West 34th Street in Chelsea, New York City.

p. 14The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

The guidelines also include ideas for reducing the generation of waste. For example, multifamily buildings could have ‘libraries’ that loan vacuums or drills. Households could share a barbeque grill, or toys in a playroom for kids. That would mean less packaging waste is generated after purchase, and fewer things are thrown out.

One recommendation for office buildings is to design fewer locations for throwing things out and recycling, making it more efficient for office workers to separate waste. In addition, designing for waste means planning a clear route for moving materials through a commercial building to a storage space.

But one problem is that many commercial buildings don’t have storage for trash. The result is that everything is bagged and left on the curb. The guidelines encourage owners to provide shared storage space for waste for commercial tenants.

“If there isn’t enough space, then it gets mixed all together,” Miflin told BuildingGreen. “Design can help the system work.”

Designing for take-out that comes back

About two-thirds of all packaging waste is from food. The guidelines recommend restaurants use reusable to-go containers, which customers could return. Designers could plan for that. They could design bins where customers would drop off containers or a space for a dishwasher to clean them.

The guidelines include letters of support from the NYC Mayor’s Office of Sustainability and the Department of Sanitation. Miflin and others are talking with city agencies as well as private developers about adopting the guidelines.

“It’s been an amazing process,” Miflin told BuildingGreen. “Everybody was just so motivated to deal with the issue that it made me feel really hopeful that we could change the system.”

More on Waste Design

Zero Waste? is It TRUE?

Designing the Culture of a Zero Waste City

For more information

Zero Waste Design Guidelines

USGBC Moves to Improve LEED v4 LEED v4.1, a new iteration of the green building rating system will be piloted in 2018 with the goal of smoothing over rough spots.

by Tristan Roberts

The latest version of LEED, LEED v4, became mandatory a little over a year ago. That was just after the U.S. Green Building Council’s 2016 Greenbuild conference. This year at Greenbuild, USGBC announced that it is fast-tracking development of a new iteration, LEED v4.1.

“LEED v4 has been out a long time,” says Corey Enck, director of LEED technical development at USGBC, told BuildingGreen. LEED v4’s development path started in 2009 and eventually stretched through six public comment periods and a beta program that began in 2013, before the system became mandatory in 2016 (see LEED 2012 Postponed to 2013, Renamed LEED v4). “A lot of the things we wrote into that need a bit of a refresh,” says Enck. “We need to make sure that LEED is still relevant and is still the leadership standard.”

According to Enck, the refresh will start with the operations and maintenance (O+M) standard before addressing building design and construction (BD+C). USGBC hopes to release v4.1 drafts of both systems in the first quarter of 2018 and immediately open them for piloting by LEED projects.

“That real-world experience will give us the feedback we need,” says Enck, adding that he anticipates a public comment period after six to twelve months of piloting.

Continued focus on performance, with Arc

The focus of LEED v4 has been building performance, and Enck said that would continue with LEED v4.1. “We want to make sure that LEED certified buildings are performing as expected,” he said. “Also, that if you earn a LEED credit that you’re receiving the environmental benefit and outcomes that were desired.”

USGBC and its certification partner Green Business Certification Inc. have been heavily promoting their technology platform, Arc, as a tool for LEED certification (see New Tech Startup, Arc Skoru, to Support USGBC, GBCI with Data), so it’s no surprise that Arc will feature more heavily in LEED v4.1.

“Arc provides that platform to start to measure those key metrics that we need,” explained Enck. “For BD+C we would like to reference Arc as the platform where you can track your

Photo: Chris Rosen

Recycling and trash cans on Greenpoint Avenue in Brooklyn, New York.

p. 15The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

ongoing performance, and where you can start to pursue ongoing certification.” Enck also noted that Arc, LEED BD+C, and LEED O+M in some cases use different metrics, and LEED v4.1 is an opportunity to align those. “O+M v4.1 will see the most amount of change,” he said. “With 4.1 we will embed Arc and the performance scores into O+M more directly to try to streamline the O+M rating system.”

Arc scores projects from interior spaces to cities using proprietary algorithms. It has been criticized for lack of transparency, even as more projects become certified by using Arc as a “performance path.” Enck noted that the v4.1 effort “also gives an opportunity to public comment and ballot the performance scores within Arc.”

Changes to credits

Expect changes throughout LEED v4, especially to credits that have proven difficult or outright unachievable to project teams based on data collected by USGBC. Enck previewed the following ideas, however:

• The ASHRAE 90.1 energy standard referenced in LEED’s energy prerequisite and credit is likely to be updated from the 2010 to the 2013 version. In addition, USGBC is considering raising the bar across the board in a more rigorous way on carbon emissions, sparked in part by a blog post on LEEDuser by Greg Kats. (Enck noted that in this, as in other areas, USGBC would carefully balance leadership on environmental imperatives with likelihood of market adoption.)

• The low-emitting materials credit is likely to be streamlined. “There has been market transformation” to support achievement of this credit, “but the calculations are quite hard,” acknowledges Enck.

• The building product disclosure and optimization (BPDO) credits are likely to see some changes to put them more in reach. As recently chronicled by BuildingGreen,

several options within these three key materials credits are virtually unachievable.

In other changes, USGBC is looking at combining the various LEED for Homes rating systems (including regular LEED for Homes as well as Mid-Rise) into LEED Residential. It is also considering streamlining LEED for Neighborhood Development and linking it with LEED for Cities/Communities (see D.C. Goes Platinum In First LEED for Cities Certification).

Higher-scoring projects?

There’s a rule of thumb that a project on track to achieve one level in the older LEED 2009 rating system, can expect its certification to step down one level in LEED v4. (This is the case both in credit achievability and cost, as reviewed in BuildingGreen’s Cost of LEED v4 report.) Asked if this might change, Enck said, “Projects that pursue v4.1 will likely be better projects than those that pursue v4. They will be higher performing because they will now have more credits they can pursue that will be on the table.” How will that shake out in points achieved? “For v4.1 you might have to stretch more on energy, but you’ll have other credits in reach as well,” says Enck.

Building Industry Helps Disaster Victims Recover How an architectural firm, timber company, and carpenters’ union are helping communities rebuild after Maria, Harvey, and the California wildfires.

by Nancy Eve Cohen

One disaster after another, like a game of dominoes, toppled communities across North America this summer and fall.

Harvey, Irma, Jose, Maria, the earthquake in Mexico, the wildfires in northern California. More than enough to numb the most empathetic into listless apathy.

But those in the building industry are not sitting still. Many are raising funds and using their skills and machinery to help people recover.

On the night of September 20, as Maria hammered Puerto Rico, destroying the power grid, New York architect Jonathan Marvel brainstormed with two friends who, like him, had grown up on the island. “There were no flights, no communications, but we said, ‘How can we help the most people as fast as possible with our own expertise?’”

He and his compadres Cristina Roig, a lawyer, and Walter Meyer, an urban designer (who had installed solar panels in Rockaway, New York after Superstorm Sandy), came up with the idea to use solar energy to light up the plazas of every municipality in Puerto Rico.

Within a week, Marvel, whose firm has offices in both New York and San Juan, flew to Puerto Rico to buy solar panels and racking systems from solar developers. As his plane banked over the island known for its lush vegetation, he saw his childhood home transformed: “Instead of green jungles and palm trees, you see brown. Just everything brown.” And blue tarps covering roofs.

A representative from Angel Zayas Engineers inspecting the photovoltaic (PV) installation on the rooftop of Buena Vista Hato Rey community center in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Photo: Marvel Marchand Architects

p. 16The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

Working with Angel Zayas, an electrical engineer who donated his time, Marvel launched the nonprofit Resilient Power Puerto Rico to install battery-backed solar energy projects. They built “solar hubs” in community centers, chosen because they have kitchens, bathrooms, and classrooms for people to gather—along with flat, concrete roofs to site the photovoltaic (PV) panels.

The first three hubs went up in Caño Martín Peña, a densely populated, flood-prone neighborhood of 20,000 people in San Juan, where Marvel’s mother had once worked as a community organizer.

Each solar hub has twenty 300-watt panels, backed by lithium batteries and anchored on roofs to withstand 157 mile-per-hour winds—the force of a Category 5 hurricane. The flat roofs, on an island close to the equator, are perfect for generating solar energy.

The systems in Caño power 12 ceiling fans, a large refrigerator that stores medicine, 12 computers, charging stations, a water filtration plant, as well as 30 LED lights.

A poetic moment of solar-powered disaster assistance

“Providing these communities with electricity, even in a very limited amount,” said Marvel, “is a symbolic way to give hope.” Light, he says, allows people to help each other, such as assisting in submitting Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) applications.

Before the hubs, gas and diesel generators powered the community centers. “The most poetic moment was when those generators were turned off.” said Marvel. “The same light, fans, and refrigerators were still operating without the noise and the toxic fumes.”

Marvel fronted $25,000 for each of the three hubs, and paid licensed electricians and carpenters until the project’s crowdsourcing campaign kicked in. By early November,

Resilient Power Puerto Rico had raised $175,000, with a goal of $2.5 million.

The next step is to build solar installations in each of the 78 municipalities in Puerto Rico (including its islands Vieques and Culebra). “One hundred sites in 100 days” is Marvel’s mantra.

Part of the mission is to train local installers, to bring more jobs to the solar industry, and to reduce the use of fossil fuels on the island.

“The ultimate goal, by the end of 2018, by next hurricane season, is that there is a robust, grassroots micro-grid in place in Puerto Rico,” said Marvel.

FSC-certified wood company fundraises for fire-damaged communities

More than 3,600 miles from Puerto Rico, Californians, also, are recovering. Fast-moving, high-intensity wildfires in the northern part of the state killed dozens of people and destroyed 8,400 buildings this fall, according to state authorities.

Forty-two people lost their lives, including teenagers and elders in their 80s and 90s—and even one 100-year-old man. In more than one

case, elderly husbands and wives died together.

The Mendocino Family of Companies, which grows and sells Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood, has launched a campaign to raise funds to help communities recover. Through its Redwood Valley and Santa Rosa Community Recovery Fund, the company is matching every dollar that is contributed up to $400,000, and is distributing it in Mendocino and Sonoma Counties.

John Andersen, director of forest policy for the Mendocino and Humboldt Redwood Companies, part of the Mendocino Family of Companies, said as the fires spread across the landscape on October 22, “the numbers were just staggering and growing by thousands of acres throughout the day.”

One fire came close to the eastern edge of the company’s forest, but firefighters stopped it, and the forest was spared.

Andersen said the fires left very few houses untouched, leaving behind a charred landscape, black and grey. Grasslands and oak woodlands, which are not commercially harvested, burned.

The Coffey Park neighborhood in Santa Rosa, California, was devastated by wildfire in October 2017.

Photo: California National Guard by Sgt. 1st Class Benjamin Cosse. License: CC BY 2.0.

p. 17The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

“It really looked like pictures of World War I, where you just see buildings brought straight to the ground,” said Andersen. “About the only thing standing are things like brick or stone chimneys.” And metallic swing sets and burnt-out cars.

About seventeen employees of the Mendocino Family of Companies were evacuated from their homes. Half of them lost their entire homes and everything in them, short of the few things they were able to grab when they were evacuated. The company is offering “relocation bonuses and has also licensed its heavy equipment and operators to participate in the clean-up efforts,” according to a written statement.

The company is focusing its fundraising efforts on community assets that may not be covered by FEMA. “We’ve lost parks that our kids play in, community centers, ball fields,” said Andersen. The fund also focuses on elder and youth centers, public safety buildings, and schools. “We are also considering any needs for animals,” he added, because many in the area owned livestock and barns that may have not been insured. The fund may also pay to plant trees for watershed restoration.

Andersen says his company and many others are talking with state lawmakers about how to make the state’s forests healthier and fire resistant.

“The fires that happened around us certainly were exacerbated because we have had decades of fire suppression and very little management, thinning, or removal of brush,” said Andersen. “That’s a bad mix when you have the right fire conditions: low humidity and high winds.”

Andersen says in his opinion one thing that’s needed is prescribed fires, but not near houses.

Union raises funds for carpenters and millwrights devastated by Harvey

About 2,000 miles southeast of the fires, Harvey, a Category 4 hurricane, clobbered Texas on August 25. Pounding waves, storm surge as high as seven feet, and wind gusts as fast as 150 mph tore apart flooded homes and other buildings.

But that wasn’t the end of it. The storm stalled for days, moving slowly east, dropping nearly 52 inches of rain east of Houston, until it made landfall in Louisiana.

Dozens of people lost their lives.

The day after Harvey hit, staff at the Central South Carpenters Regional Council, part of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (UBC), began phoning each of their 2,300 union members from Texas and Louisiana, in areas affected by the storm, to see if they were okay. They offered assistance evacuating people along with food, and later, monetary assistance.

“It was just mass devastation because of the sheer number of people living in Houston, Beaumont, and Lake Charles,“ said Jason Engels, the executive secretary-treasurer of the Central South Carpenters Regional Council.

Some of the members’ homes were so badly damaged they can’t be salvaged. Some lost everything, including their tools.

“Our union was there for them and not just our council,” said Engels. The UBC and union councils from across the country and Canada, along with members of the public and industry donated thousands of dollars and “literally tons” of supplies. One council from Chicago sent “two or three eighteen-wheeler-loads of water right after the storm,” said Engels. One company, Ariat International, sent 200 pairs of waterproof boots, critical for rebuilding.

Since Harvey came through, the Central South Carpenters’ Disaster Relief Fund has disbursed $248,000 to 156 members.

The union also donated cleaning supplies and drywall to the carpenters and millwrights whose homes had been devastated. Many union members, with their carpentry skills, went right to work. “Within three or four weeks of the storm, they had gutted their Sheetrock and were rebuilding; replacing floors and Sheetrock and baseboards,” Engels said.

This union council is no stranger to natural disasters and expects more. “Unfortunately, we have been through

Photo: SC National Guard, U.S. Air National Guard by Staff Sgt. Daniel J. Martinez. License: Public domain.

The floods of Hurricane Harvey in Port Arthur, Texas, on August 31, 2017.

p. 18The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

many floods,” said Engels. Tornadoes and hurricanes are common in the region.

The union started the Disaster Relief Fund after Katrina in 2005 and has kept it going ever since. “We will always keep this,” said Engels.

Engels said most of the union members whose homes were damaged by the floodwaters are resilient. “Their spirits are up. The rebuilding process has begun.” But as someone who lived through Katrina, Engels also cautions that the recovery may take years.

NEWSBRIEFS

Healthier Affordable Housing Thanks to Fitwel and Fannie Mae A new program offers reduced interest rates plus a refund on Fitwel certification fees.

by Paula Melton

Affordable housing developers have a new reason to prioritize health and safety: it can save them money. The new program Healthy Hous-ing Rewards, from lender Fannie Mae, provides loan recipients with a reduced interest rate when proj-ects achieve certification through the health-promoting program Fitwel (see Fitwel: Science That Works). Fannie Mae is a private–public partnership backed by Congress.

Most residents in affordable rental housing tend to stay longer than those in market rate. Bob Simpson, vice president of affordable and green financing at Fannie Mae, said the program with Fitwel is a chance to make a difference for these households. “It’s very much their home,” said Simpson. “If you have an opportunity to define that place in a way that kids are going to grow up in a healthy environment, you really have to take advantage of that opportunity.”

The Center for Active Design, which manages Fitwel, announced its

expansion into the multifamily market at the same time that it announced the Fannie Mae partnership. Previously, the program applied only to commercial offices.

President and CEO Joanna Frank said the programs have a lot in common, but the residential version emphasizes a few different priorities because the science behind it is different. The residential program is based on evidence- backed research on lead safety, control of moisture and mold, and access to healthy food options in nearby grocery stores.

The residential standard applies to both affordable and market-rate housing, but there are upfront costs. “You have to be able to demonstrate return on investment to encourage the use of health-promoting design strategies,” Frank told BuildingGreen. But that’s difficult to do with affordable housing since you can’t charge higher rent for certified properties.

Frank hopes Healthy Housing Rewards will help Fitwel achieve a new scale of impact—“that this is something that reaches every project and just becomes the standard by which everyone is renovating existing projects as well as building new projects.”

More on green affordable housing

Affordable Housing and Sustainable Design: The Goals Are Aligned

Financing Affordable Housing; Not for the Faint of Heart

How Six Affordable Housing Projects Got to Green

For more information

Center for Active Design centerforactivedesign.org

USGBC Announces RELi As Its Resilient Design Rating SystemRELi is USGBC’s new standard for projects designed to endure and recover from extreme weather.

by Nancy Eve Cohen

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) launched a new certification Tuesday that sets the first standard for designing buildings and communities that withstand and recover from natural disasters including floods, tornadoes, droughts, and wildfires.

Mahesh Ramanujam, president and CEO of USGBC and Green Business Certification Inc. (GBCI) announced the new resilient design rating system, called RELi (pronounced ‘rely’), during an opening summit at the Greenbuild Convention in Boston.

“Designing with resiliency in mind is crucial to developing sustainable buildings, communities, and cities,” said Ramanujam. “We need to raise awareness, increase capacity and adoption of resiliency in our built environment if we truly want to realize a sustainable future for all.”

Ramanujam said GBCI will verify certification of projects under the RELi standard, develop an associated professional credential program, and scale “this mission to the global market place.”

U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Bill Huntington. License: Public domain.

Technical sargeant Keith Berry looks down into flooded streets searching for survivors. He is part of an Air Force Reserve team credited with saving more than 1,040 people in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

p. 19The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

RELi was developed by The Institute for Market Transformation to Sustainability (MTS) to help design teams plan for hazards and emergencies that could cut power and heat, or compromise a building’s functionality. (For more on RELi, see The C3 Living Design Project.)

RELi has been developed for more than two years (see The Four Core Issues to Tackle for Resilient Design).

GBCI’s announcement comes after a historic season of hurricanes and wildfires that devastated communities across North America and the Caribbean, which are just now beginning to recover and rebuild.

At the beginning of the design process, the RELi system lays out a “panoramic” approach that requires studying the adaptation needs of a project and facilitating an integrative design process that includes community stakeholders.

RELi specifies steps for preparing for hazards and emergencies by making sure people have food, water, back-up power, and the technology to communicate in the days or weeks following a disaster.

It includes specific requirements such as providing first aid training for a percentage of staff or occupants, 96 hours of emergency supplies such as “compressed food bars” and low-glycemic foods, as well as basic communication technologies, including land-lines, text-messaging, and walkie-talkies.

Projects can also earn points towards certification by including provisions for people in the community who don’t live in the building. For example, there are credits that set standards for providing food, water, sanitation, and shelter for twice the project occupancy.

RELi also requires avoiding developing in vulnerable areas and providing backup power as well as infrastructure for temporary generators and boilers.

USGBC, GBCI, and MTS will establish a RELi Steering Committee “to enhance the current resilient standard that will also include the LEED pilot credit,” according to Ramanujam. The Steering Committee will be chaired by Doug Pierce of Perkins+Will, lead author of RELi.

“I’m thrilled that the U.S. Green Building Council will be taking a leadership role with resilience,” noted Alex Wilson, founder of the Resilient Design Institute and BuildingGreen. Wilson was co-chair of the USGBC Resilience Working Group, which is being sunset, and will be vice-chair of the new RELi Steering Committee. “Events this year in Houston, Florida, Puerto Rico, and Northern California have amplified just how important resilience is for our nation’s well- being.” Wilson was instrumental in the development of the Resilient Design pilot credits in LEED, which are being folded into RELi.

“With the stakes so high,” Ramanujam said, “we have no time to waste, and now is the time to combine all of our efforts to make sure we are looking in the same direction and have a stronger planet.”

PRODUCT REVIEW

BuildingGreen Announces Top 10 Products for 2018 Our innovative Top 10 product selections improve IAQ, save energy and water, contain fewer hazardous materials, and promote material transparency.

by Brent Ehrlich

For the past 16 years, BuildingGreen has selected ten green building products that significantly improve upon standard “business-as-usual” practices. These products improve indoor air quality, consume less energy and water, reduce waste, and can even have a net-positive impact on the environment.

This year’s BuildingGreen Approved winners:

• AirFlow Panels

• Grayworks Modular Graywater System

• Humanscale Float Table

• ROMABIO Domus Interior Paint

• Roxul AFB evo and Thermafiber Formaldehyde-Free SAFB Batt Insulations

• SEMCO 3fficiency

• SunPower Carport Solutions

• Thyssenkrupp Elevators

• VersaDry Track System

• VIG Technologies Tempered Vacuum Insulated Glass

AirFlow Panels

Saving energy while providing fresh air is not easy. Air from an open window is rarely the ideal combination of temperature and humidity. Centralized fresh-air supplies require large, inefficient fans and complicated ductwork. And standard energy-recovery ventilators take up valuable building space. AirFlow Panels are façade panels that incorporate a thin, ultra- efficient energy-recovery ventilator (ERV) system. They can provide 200 cubic feet per minute (cfm) of pre- conditioned air directly to the building perimeter, significantly reducing the size of cooling coils, ducts, or other equipment used in centralized systems. This results in 30%–40%

Photo: AirFlow

AirFlow Panels

p. 20The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

energy savings, according to the company. Insulated to approximately R-14, the panels incorporate a proprietary ERV core, MERV 13 and MERV 8 filters, energy-efficient fans, and a backflow damper to maintain pressure. They are available with skins to match a variety of façade colors and materials. (See BuildingGreen’s product review, Façade as Ventilation: Moving beyond Open Windows.)

Grayworks Modular Graywater System

Reusing graywater from showers and sinks saves water, energy, and other resources but typically requires complicated systems cobbled together from individual components. This makes commissioning difficult and compromises these systems’ long-term effectiveness. The Grayworks modular graywater system simplifies water reuse in commercial buildings using a small, modular plug-and-play design. It can treat from 1,000 to 10,000 gallons of graywater per day, depending on system. The package includes a self-cleaning vortex pre- filter, a proprietary bioreactor that breaks down pollutants, another filter to remove remaining solids, and ultraviolet light to disinfect the water. Grayworks also offers an optional chlorine treatment (required by most codes for water reuse indoors) and dye system (to mark treated water as graywater). A polypropylene storage tank with ¾″ thick walls holds the water. The system controls can be integrated into building management systems, with access via a dashboard

and the Internet. (See BuildingGreen’s product review, Modular, Onsite Graywater System.)

Humanscale Float Table

Standing desks have become a popular way to stay active at work and reduce the negative health impacts of sitting. Not all standing desks are created equal, though. Humanscale’s Float table uses an innovative counterbalance mechanism that allows users to adjust the height of the desk with one hand, without the

need for cranks or motors. The Float table is Living Building Challenge Red List Compliant and was the first product to be certified as a Living Product by the International Living Future Institute: this signifies it has a net-positive impact on water, energy, climate, and other metrics. Float’s manufacturing process produces more energy than it consumes, yet the desk is made without formaldehyde or other Red List chemicals (depending on the desktop specified). The Float table can be adjusted while carrying up to 130 pounds and comes with a five-year warranty. (See BuildingGreen’s product review, An Adjustable Desk That Stands Up for the Environment.)

ROMABIO Domus Interior Paint

The ROMABIO Domus line of modified potassium silicate-based paints is formulated as a drop-in replacement for standard acrylic latex.

Most natural paints lack the durability necessary for commercial interiors, but ROMABIO’s potassium silicate paints react with minerals in the substrate to create a strong, crystalline matrix. The paints also include added solids for better cover. They provide better permeability for wall assemblies and better mold resistance, and are not made from fossil fuels. ROMABIO’s Domus paints are zero VOC and meet CDPH Standard Method v1.1. They have a Health Product Declaration and Cradle to Cradle (C2C) Silver v3.1 certification (with Gold for Renewable Energy and Carbon Management). The paints have a Declare label and contain no Living Building Challenge Red List chemicals. (See BuildingGreen’s product review, Mineral-Based Interior Paints Go Mainstream.)

Roxul AFB evo and Thermafiber Formaldehyde-Free SAFB Batt Insulations

In 2017, Thermafiber and Roxul both introduced the industry’s first light-density, formaldehyde-free

Photo: Grayworks

Grayworks Modular Graywater System

Photo: Humanscale

Humanscale Float Table

Photo: ROMABIO

ROMABIO Domus Interior Paint

Photo: Roxul

Roxul AFB evo

p. 21The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

mineral wool batt insulation products. While most mineral wool batt insulation is held together with resins made from formaldehyde, a carcinogen and respiratory irritant, Thermafiber Formaldehyde-Free SAFB and Roxul AFB evo are certified UL Formaldehyde Free and use biobased resins. The performance of these batts has not changed. They offer excellent fire resistance and sound attenuation, and R-values around 4, depending on density. Both batts are also Greenguard Gold certified for indoor air quality and have Declare labels, and Thermafiber also has a C2C Gold Material Health Certificate. They have 40% or 70% pre-consumer recycled content, for Roxul and Thermafiber, respectively. (See BuildingGreen’s product review, Mineral Wool Batts Now Formaldehyde-Free.)

SEMCO 3fficiency

Chilled beams are energy-efficient HVAC systems, but they have a reputation for having condensation problems, being complicated to install, and not having good zone controls. SEMCO’s 3fficiency system combines the company’s Pinnacle dedicated outdoor air supply, Neuton

pump control module, and active chilled beams into one easy-to- specify system. The key to 3fficiency is the Neuton pump module, an all-in-one “plug-and-play” controller that simplifies chilled beam installation and communicates with the Pinnacle air supply to adjust temperature and humidity. This in turn reduces the chance of condensation. The Neuton allows for control of up to five individual rooms or zones and comes prepackaged with cold and hot water connections, sensors, valves, control software, and a Grundfos variable-speed ECM pump (a 2010 BuildingGreen Top 10 award winner).

SunPower Carport Solutions

Photovoltaics (PV) are a critical part of our energy infrastructure and future, but placing them on commer-cial roofs can pose problems due to obstructions and access, steep pitches, and aging roofs. On land, companies

may not have enough real estate for ground-mounted solar installations. SunPower Carport Solutions opti-mize underutilized spaces, such as parking lots and garages. Available in single- and dual-tilt, long-span, and garage-top applications, these sys-tems can also incorporate stormwater management, LED lighting, energy storage, and electric vehicle charging. They also provide shade, adding comfort and reducing building cooling energy. These systems are available with Sunpower panels that are C2C v3.1 Silver, and they have a Declare label.

Thyssenkrupp Elevators

Companies that manufacture mechanical, plumbing, and electrical equipment (MEP), and related systems such as elevators, rarely pursue material transparency initiatives. The systems are complicated, and their main focus is energy efficiency—which is understandable. Thyssenkrupp is the first elevator manufacturer to have C2C Material Health certificates—C2C Bronze for its cabs and Platinum for enviromax biodegradable fluid. It’s also the first to publish an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) and a Declare label (Living Building Challenge Compliant) for its endura MRL cab. In addition, the cab meets California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Standard Method v1.1 for low indoor emissions. The company is also aggressively pursuing energy savings. It created the first net-zero elevator for an existing building, retrofitting the elevator system at the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable Energy Systems in Boston. The company used the Synergy elevator with regenerative drive and LED cab lighting, and the net-zero process led to discoveries that reduced standby power draw by about 75%. (See BuildingGreen’s product review, The Great Transparent Elevator: Disclosure on the Rise for Conveying Systems.

Photo: Thermafiber

Thermafiber Formaldehyde-Free SAFB

Photo: SEMCO

SEMCO 3fficiency

Photo: SunPowerSunPower Carport Solutions

Photo: thyssenkrupp

thyssenkrupp Elevators

p. 22The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

VersaDry Track System

Drywall installed directly on the floor is easily damaged by moisture that gets into buildings during construction or due to nuisance leaks. Because moisture wicks through the drywall, a small leak can cause expensive damage that wastes materials and labor, requires expensive remediation, and creates landfill waste. It also creates ideal conditions for mold growth. VersaDry Track System solves this problem using a 26-gauge galvanized steel track system that raises drywall two inches off the floor. This system protects the drywall during construction or if a spill or leak wets the concrete floor. It also eliminates the need for a bottom track in light-gauge steel-framed partition walls. Gaining two inches at the base means you don’t need to use 9- or 10-foot long drywall sheets for 8-foot high drop ceilings, eliminating cut-off waste. VersaDry also simplifies baseboard installation and protects baseboards from damage from cleaning equipment. (See our blog post, Pete’s Product Puzzle: VersaDry.)

VIG Technologies Tempered Vacuum Insulated Glass

VIG Technologies with LandVac/Landglass is offering the first metal- seal tempered vacuum-insulated glass (VIG). Removing the air from between glazing provides amazing thermal and acoustical performance, but the technology is difficult to manufacture. At only 1⁄₃″ thick, the VIG Technologies VIG has a minimum U-value of 0.10 (R-10), with U-0.08 (R-13) possible. The company uses a proprietary edge-sealing technology that works

with the tempered glass. Micro- support pillars keep glass surfaces from touching. This VIG comes standard with low-e coatings and can be customized depending on end use and window orientation. The thermal performance of this glazing is equal to standard triple- and quadruple-glazed windows that are almost four inches thick, making it a good choice for retrofits or where space is limited. Manufactured in sizes up to 60″ x 98″, Tempered VIG will be available from several manufacturers in 2018.

PRIMER

Certified Communities: When Greening Neighborhoods One Building at a Time Isn’t Enough A comparison of community- scale certification programs.

by James Wilson

Within the design and construction industry there is a growing sense of urgency to find sustainability and resilience solutions that can be applied at scale. One way to do this is to focus on neighborhoods, and over the past few years several organizations have responded by launching programs

designed to support this strategy. (For an in-depth discussion of district-scale approaches to sustainability, see our feature article Community-Scale Sustainability: Accelerating Change for People and Planet.)

While some of these programs have been around for a while, such as LEED for Neighborhood Development, others, like the WELL Community Standard, are only in pilot phases. And though programs like LEED have trained us to think in terms of projects earning certification, that’s not necessarily the goal here. 2030 Districts, for example, does not offer a certification at all.

Many programs offer useful tools and guidance that any community project can use whether or not it’s pursuing certification. For example, the STAR Rating System can be used as a stand-alone framework and the organization also provides supplementary resources, including case studies and a project management tool.

And although most of the programs can be applied to many different project types, some are designed for more specific uses. Enterprise Green Communities Certification, for example, is for affordable housing developments only, and STAR was developed for use by local governments.

For a community project wondering which program might be ideal for its particular characteristics and needs, we’ve created a table to help project teams better understand how they

Photo: VersaDry

VersaDry Track System

Photo: VIG Technologies

VIG Technologies Tempered Vacuum Insulated Glass

Photo: dumbonyc. License: CC BY-SA 2.0.

A number of programs are available to guide sustainable development at the district scale. In New York City, a 2030 District is being established to address the goals of the 2030 Challenge, as well as the city's various climate, energy, and resiliency plans.

p. 23The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

Program EcoDistricts Certified 2030 Districts (no certification)

Living Community Challenge

LEED for Communities/ Cities (pilot)

Affiliated Organization EcoDistricts 2030 District Network International Living Future

Institute US Green Building Council

Applicable Project Types

• Existing Neighborhoods• Brownfield Sites• Business Districts• Institutional Campuses• Industrial Lands• Mixed-Use Districts

Generally intended for urban or urbanizing areas like central business districts

New or existing communities, from individual neighborhoods up to entire cities (single or multiple ownership)

Existing communities, from individual neighborhoods up to entire cities

Focus / ScopeHolistic, emphasizes equity, resilience, and climate pro-tection

Focused on building performance & transportation emissions, emphasizes private-sector led strategies that align with market realities

Holistic, emphasizes regeneration through net-pos-itive performance and using nature as design guide

Holistic, emphasizes ongoing measurement of quantitative performance metrics

Key Strategies

Implement framework for flexible but rigorous process to drive equitable sustainable development projects

• Coordinate efforts• Aggregate tools and

resources• Provide education &

outreach

• Set Net-Positive performance targets

• Conduct visioning & planning process to achieve community consensus behind effective strategies

• Measure & analyze ongoing performance

• Identify synergies & composite solutions

Requirements

Submit documents for approval:• Imperatives Commitment • Roadmap • Biennial progress reports

To establish a district, 10 owners, 10% of commercial space, or owners of a total of 10 million square feet must participate

Submit Vision & Master Plan for approval and achieve all 7 “Petals”

(certification thru proven performance)

*Specific requirements apply for community-owned build-ings

*Recertification is required

Achieve minimum 40 points out of 110 possible

(points based on 14 metrics)

Key Stakeholders

• Neighborhood groups• Property owners• Developers• Utilities • Municipalities

2030 District Partner Types:• Property Owners /

Managers & Developers• Services Stakeholders • Community Stakeholders

• Community stakeholders• Property Owners• Developers• Municipalities

• “Project Team”• “Community Stakeholder

Groups”

Governance“Backbone Organization” (community development corporation)

“Sponsor Organization”(non-profit group, USGBC chapter, BID)

Multiple sources of authority (ex. owners, government, community groups)

Local government authority

Example Project (PDF) Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA Pittsburgh, PA First Hill, Seattle

(Exploratory Project) Washington, D.C.

Key Resource (PDF) EcoDistricts Protocol Introduction to 2030 Districts Living Community Challenge

StandardGuide to LEED Certification: Cities and Communities Pilot

Website ecodistricts.org 2030districts.org living-future.org/lcc usgbc.org

Community Programs

continued on next page

p. 24The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

Program LEED for Neighborhood Development STAR-Certified WELL Community Standard

(pilot) Green Communities

Affiliated Organization US Green Building Council STAR Communities International WELL Building

Institute Enterprise Community Partners

Applicable Project Types

New land development projects or redevelopment projects containing residential uses, nonresidential uses, or a mix.

Cities and counties of all sizes

*No size limits but govern-ment entity must be primary applicant

New and existing public or private developments

*Specific size & program requirements apply

All new and renovated stand-alone single-family & multi-family buildings that contain affordable housing units

Focus / Scope

Holistic, emphasizes smart site selection & growth, human scale development, and efficient buildings & infrastructure

Holistic, emphasizes local government-led strategies and interventions with measurable outcomes

Focused on health and wellness, emphasizing inclusiveness, integration, and resiliency

Holistic, emphasizes incorporating public health, environmental and economic benefits into housing

Key Strategies Implement prescriptive design strategies

• Implement prescriptive design strategies

• Measure & analyze ongoing performance

• Implement prescriptive design strategies

• Measure & analyze ongoing performance

Implement prescriptive design strategies

RequirementsAchieve minimum 40 points out of 110 possible

(43 Credits)

Achieve minimum 250 points out of 750 possible

(526 Measures)

*Recertification is required

Achieve minimum 50 points out of 140 possible

(110 Features)

*Specific requirements apply for developer-owned buildings

*Recertification is required

Achieve minimum 35 points for new construction, 30 points for rehab projects

*Projects subject to on-site audit

Key Stakeholders

“Project Team”:• Applicant acting as team

leader• Multidisciplinary group of

design professionals• Local supporting partners

• Local governmental agencies

• Community stakeholders• Civic partners

• Community stakeholders• Property owners• Tenants

• Owners• Project design teams• O+M staff• Residents

GovernanceLEED applicant/ project team leader, generally owner/developer

Local government authority Owner and/or local government authority

Owner/Developer

Example Project (PDF)

Paseo Verde / 9th and Berks Street TOD Northampton, MA Water Street Tampa Serviam Gardens, Bronx, NY

Key Resource (PDF)

LEED Reference Guide for Neighborhood Development

STAR Community Rating System (v2.0)

Guide to the WELL Community Standard Pilot

2015 Enterprise Green Communities Criteria

Website usgbc.org starcommunities.org wellcertified.com enterprisecommunity.org

Community Programs (continued)

Source: BuildingGreen, Inc.

p. 25The BuildingGreen Report • December 2017

compare. (You can also download a one-page PDF version of the table.)

What’s the target and how do we get there?

Most of the programs take a holistic approach, addressing the full spectrum of sustainability categories, from energy efficiency and resilience to human experience and economic prosperity. But some are more narrowly focused. The 2030 Districts program, for example, focuses on improving operational building performance while the WELL Community Standard looks at increasing the health and wellness of a community’s occupants. Other programs are holistic but have certain emphases. For example, EcoDistricts’ primary mission is promoting equity and the Living Community Challenge’s central aim is regenerative design.

Although each of the programs establishes particular goals for a community, some put focus on the outcome, while others are much more concerned with the process of meeting those goals.

For example, LEED-ND and Green Communities are similar to traditional strategy-based green building rating systems in that they prescribe particular techniques for achieving specific outcomes.

And LEED for Communities/Cities defines a set of specific metrics for evaluating a community’s performance but does not dictate what a community should do to improve performance. The core resource offered by the program is a robust data collection and analysis tool—the Arc platform—that allows a community to try different strategies and measure the effectiveness of each.

In contrast, EcoDistricts does not define specific, quantifiable metrics for success. Instead, it offers a flexible framework and a range of resources that a community can adapt to guide a rigorous process without being prescriptive. The Living Community Challenge is similar. Though it does

define specific goals like net-positive energy and water, it also does not prescribe specific design strategies for achieving these goals. The program is designed to support a community- based planning process to develop solutions informed by the local culture.

Comparatively, 2030 Districts does not emphasize community involvement. Rather, it is based on the idea that the private sector—including property owners and developers—should be leading the effort to find solutions that align with market realities.

Communities may want to combine frameworks. For example, a neighbor-hood may establish an EcoDistrict to focus on developing projects to increase community health and livability, and a 2030 District to focus on coordinating and mobilizing property owners to improve building performance. As part of a coordinated effort, the two programs could share knowledge and resources to achieve their individual goals more efficiently while collectively maximizing impact.

Credibility, accountability, competitiveness

As with individual buildings, earning certification demonstrates commitment. It’s a way for a community to be a leader and set an example. It also gives communities that want to attract businesses, investment, and residents a competitive edge.

But in addition, when it comes to community-scale sustainable development, using a third-party certification can prove to be critical to success. The boost in credibility gained by certification can attract community buy-in and involvement. It could also lead to more financial support as sponsors are often more comfortable providing funds to projects that demonstrate accountability.

As was the case with building-scale rating systems, the hope is that these community-scale programs will transform the market while improving

quality of life—but at a much faster rate and for many more people.

For more information

EcoDistricts ecodistricts.org

2030 Districts Network 2030districts.org

International Living Future Institute living-future.org/lcc

US Green Building Council new.usgbc.org/cert-guide/ cities-communities usgbc.org/guide/nd

STAR Communities starcommunities.org

International WELL Building Institute wellcertified.com/en/resources/well-community-standard-pilot

Enterprise Community Partners enterprisecommunity.org/ solutions-and-innovation/ green-communities