Getting Greener in North Carolina?
Emily Beth Sheppard
PLS 521
Mark Imperial
Nov. 30, 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. LAND USE CONCERNS p. 3
II. POTENTIAL LAND USE IMPROVEMENTS p. 5
1. Smart Growth
2. Conservation Design Concepts p. 6
3. Local Examples of Conservation Design p. 8
III. GREEN BUILDING p. 9
1. Defining LEED p. 9
2. LEED Examples (The Phillip Merrill Environmental Center) p.11
IV. NORTH CAROLINA’S SUSTAINABLE EFFORTS p. 12
V. SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATIONS OF GREEN POWER & DESIGN p. 16
1. NC WAY TO GO PROGRAM p. 16
2. ENERGY STAR PRODUCTS p. 17
3. NC GREEN POWER p. 17
a. Photolvoltaics p. 18
b. Wind Power
c. Earned Tax Credits
VI. POSITIVE EXAMPLES ELSEWHERE p. 19
VII. LOCAL EFFORTS ON THE COAST p. 21
1. CAPE FEAR GREEN BUILDING ALLIANCE
2. NC HEALTHY BUILT HOMES p. 22
3. NC SOLAR CENTER
VIII. SUMMARY p. 23
TABLE from BEATLEY p. 24
CHART from U.S.G.B.C. p. 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY p. 26
Getting Greener in North Carolina?
Growing “green” in North Carolina means recognition of previous development mistakes, education to proceed successfully, and incentives to bring change. With increased awareness, America is looking at what is spread out on the table in terms of our most vital structures - public buildings and residential homes. These concerns are leading private agencies and governmental committees to address means to repair and redesign the way we use our built environment.
By the year 2020, an additional two million people are expected to take up residency in North Carolina. Much of this predicted growth is expected to occur along the coast, encompassing 20 counties in the state. For the coastal region what is our government doing to improve sustainability, protect resources, and develop efficiency in regards to the buildings we support?
LAND USE CONCERNS
Americans spend on average 90% of their time indoors, where, according to the U.S. EPA, levels of pollutants may be 2-5 times higher than the outdoor levels.
After agriculture, building is the second largest industry in the world. The manufacture of building materials consumes enormous energy. The U.S. Department of Energy reports that buildings consume about 37% of the energy and 68% of the electricity produced in the United States annually. (See Table 1 from the U.S.G.B.C. for Energy Use)
Particularly damaging to our coast is the debris from hurricanes which adds years of normal fill to our landfills, destroys much of the areas’ ecological habitat and limits the sustainability of our natural resources. These are some of the factors which motivate our government to seek improved resistance in houses from wind and floods, improved storm water management and self-reliant energy sources.
The Land Use Steering Committee of NACo calls for local governments to address the issue of more efficient land use planning and infrastructure design. In January 2005, The National Academy of Sciences recommended that Congress provide funding for more research and project models to determine the link between improved health and better land use planning. The idea of changing American’s built environment – providing more alternatives to driving with bike and walking paths and increasing housing communities with mixed use infrastructure would give Americans more opportunity to be physically active.
These long term research and pilot projects are in response to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, claiming Americais facing a growing obesity epidemic, especially among the poor, minorities and children. The Center estimated that health care costs will equal 19% of the GDP by 2014, with 1/3 of the increase in recent health issues relating to rising obesity. NACo’s land steering committee adds that the National Academy of Science wants the research to involve the DOT, HHS and other environmental agencies. (http://www.naco.org, March 7, 2005)
Another reason to improve land use in relation to living space is the Federal Reserve Bank and the Brookings Institution experts’ claim that smart growth infrastructure policies could save the United States $125 billion to $250 billion over the next 25 years. Fiscal impact research over several decades show “haphazard land use costs counties more in infrastructure and services per household than compact, mixed-use and walkable communities” (NACo site).
POTENTIAL LAND USE IMPROVEMENTS
1. Smart Growth
“Smart Growth” has been on the move in many states. Maryland, Massachusetts, California, South Carolina and Virginia offer North Carolina many learning opportunities for integrating land use strategies and building alternatives into the mainstream. Unfortunately, several of North Carolina’s coastal counties such as New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender are not currently operating with a “Smart Growth” division in their land planning offices. Better education among the community and public officials is necessary for any change.
Regardless of government involvement, many communities now participant in smarter land use strategies, including more compact development, coordinated transportation and land use planning, revitalized Main Streets and town centers, affordable housing policies, and other land use policies. These efforts are valuable for the local economy, social equity and environmental quality of counties. The NACo Board of Directors suggests that even minor changes in the country’s community design could increase biking and walking habits and reduce public health expenditures.
An example of how one state formed a user friendly resource is, “Better Models of Development in Maryland”, by Edward McMahon and Shelley Mastran. This booklet, published by The Conservation Fund, Oct. 2004, discusses regional issues, including historical preservation and provides models of responsible urban land planning. Some valid points applicable to any state:
Ø Eighty percent of everything ever built in America has been built since the end of WWII. Much of it is “off-the-shelf junk” according to McMahon.
Ø In a 2002 survey by the National Association of Realtors, parks and natural areas were ranked as highly desirable features in new home developments.
Ø A National Association of Home Builders’ survey comparing a conventional subdivision layout versus a clustered layout with 20 % preserved open space found that open space design cut development costs by 1/3.”
Ø Many zoning ordinances and maps allow for more residential and commercial development than can be supported by the infrastructure, encouraging sprawling, less efficient developments.
(McMahon, p. 48)
2. Conservation Design Concepts
The book also reviews the “conservation design concept” by land-use expert Randall Arendt. Defining open space design, Arendt points out:
Ø local zoning ordinances need to have clear standards to regulate a conservation design.
Ø The process begins with identifying land that should be permanently protected. Developers should perform a detailed site analysis, identifying all “constrained areas” such as wetlands, floodplains or steep slopes.
Ø After the green areas have been identified, the second step is laying out the houses based on density for that particular zoned project.
By putting “green boundaries” in first, Arendt points out that this conservation method is the reverse of standard subdivision layouts. Often with these, the street system is the first thing to be put in place, followed by lot lines which will then take in every available square foot of a project. This conventional method continues to be accepted as long as no alternatives are encouraged. By setting higher community standards and requiring open space as a “precondition to achieve full density,” officials in local government can encourage conservation in a positive manner.
McMahon also notes the cost advantages of open space design. Developers often save money by not building as many streets, gutters, drains or sidewalks. Numerous studies show that people will pay more for houses that are bordered by open space. A poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California revealed that many home buyers would opt to purchase an attached house near green space over a detached house not near public parks. (McMahon, p. 47).
"Land-use planning needs to be proactive. It's a vital component in a community's ability to control its own destiny," says Kate Ardizone, water quality planning specialist, with the Sea Grant team. She has been with Sea Grant since 2003 helping coastal communities revise their land-use plans under the new CAMA rules.
3. Local Examples of Conservation Design
I. A local example, Lumina Station, in Wilmington, NC, built as a “mixed use” community concept and conservation design technique. The project developer, Joel Tomaselli and architect Frank Smith designed the 9 acre parcel for pedestrians rather than vehicles. They protected clusters of hardwood trees near the shops and joined the four commercial buildings with landscaped walkways and foot bridges.
II. River Dunes is a mixed use development in Pamlico Sound, NC. A 1,300-acre pine plantation was up to sale. Four partners have developed the entire parcel into a residential and boating community. The $40 million project is the largest development project to date. The community will develop over 550 homes between the marina, creek and river side sites. Ed Mitchell, one of four River Dunes Corporation partners who saw the value of keeping the parcel intact. "We wanted to be the ones to develop it using methods to preserve the land and waterways." "If it's not economically feasible, it's not sustainable development. It has to go where the market allows," Mitchell adds. "The real estate market is changing. The demand for environmentally sensitive projects has increased," says Bill Holman, executive director of the N.C. Clean Water Management Trust Fund The River Dunes project is an example of how developers can build attractive communities that protect water quality and are profitable.
GREEN BUILDING
1. Defining LEED
The formation of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a hallmark for the green building industry. LEED is a national rating system created by the U.S. Green Building Council in 1993. The U.S. Green Building Council is a non-profit program that works with commercial and residential developers. Structured as a voluntary consensus rating, LEED uses a point system for rating different types of structures and areas for sustainable impact. In 2000 the LEED system was launched into the commercial development market. As of April 2005, 171 commercial buildings have been certified and about 1,800 have applied to be certified. The Council now has categories in place for existing buildings, new construction, commercial interiors, schools, retail buildings and other structures. The rating is based on credits earned. A certified building can attain one of four levels: Certified, Silver, Gold and Platinum.
The LEED for Homes program, which began this summer in 2005, has pilot programs around the country. (None in coastal North Carolina?) LEED workshops and certification classes provide building professionals with ample criteria in bidding on green building projects.
According to an article in the Washington Post, “Is Green Building Budding?” , there are some green-building purists concerned that the USGBC’s approach, which allows builders to self-certify that they have followed parts of a 200-page green checklist, might water down the overall effort or cause some confusion among consumers. A variety of federal, state and local green-building programs have been developed over the past ten years which rate builders with independent certification. But even die-hard green groups say the launch of the trade association's program represents a key shift from the fringe to the mainstream. "When I started five years ago, very few people knew what LEED was, very few architectural firms had a LEED-accredited professional on staff, and now they have whole sections of people," said McGuire, coordinator of Maryland's Green Building Network.
In “Costing Green: A Comprehensive Cost Database and Budgeting Methodology,” Davis Langdon, a cost consultant, observes that when comparing construction costs alone, not including the obvious benefits of improved health and energy savings, LEED construction expenses not much more expensive than a non-LEED development. He points out every building has aspects which are hard to compare to another. But, if the LEED project is well planned, there are less budget overages than what is often found in the construction of a non-LEED project. This study weakens the old criticism that building green costs too much. Langon points out variations in cost are based on location, climate and demographics. Temperature fluctuations and levels of humidity can affect the cost of mechanical systems. Yet, he points out that when designing and budgeting for a LEED project, the focus is on the structures’ sustainability and the higher the score a project receives the better able it is to self-sustain. (http://www.usgbc.org/, Langdon, July 2004, pp. 16-26)
The LEED program has 7 prerequisites and 69 possible points. The first pre-requisite is developing on a sustainable site. A Gold or Platinum rating requires creative efforts to reuse an existing site as first priority. Otherwise, the ingenuity of situating the structure for optimum sun, shade and wind for cooling are aspects of the project’s improved score. Knowing how to design a structure for optimum performance, best daylighting, and minimum impact is the key. Other LEED requirements address issues like water efficiency, including storm water management, on-site generation of renewable energy, (almost always photovoltaic), using recycled materials and resources and indoor environmental air quality. http://www.usgbc.org/(Langdon, 2004).
2. LEED examples
The Phillip Merrill Environmental Center, located in Annapolis, Maryland is headquarters for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF). It is the first green building to receive a Platinum Rating; they claim it may be the “greenest building in the world”. The 32,000 sq. ft. building was designed to function and model the possibilities of a low-impact office building. It features hand operated windows for cooling, composting toilets, motion sensor lights that automatically turn on/off, solar panels on the roof and exterior side walls for energy sources, and geothermal wells built underground to assist with cooling and heating. Also, the architects designed parking under the building to reduce impervious surface area for potential pollutant runoff as the property is situated near the Chesapeake Bay and Black Walnut Creek.
The 31 acre site once housed The Bay Ridge Inn. The new building was designed with a similar “footprint” from the inn, to minimize the land destroyed during re-construction. Site developers recycled materials from the deconstruction of the inn, such as cement being crushed and used in road construction. (Beatley, p. 267 and CBF site). According to an article in Architecture Week, when compared to typical offices buildings of the same size, the Merrill Center uses 50 percent less energy, thereby reducing air pollution. It uses one tenth the water, and leaves 85 percent of the initial site undisturbed. The construction cost was $199 per square foot ($2150 per square meter); one quarter of that was for "green" features, and much of that will be recouped through lower operating costs. ” http://www.cbf.org/site