Green Affordable Housing        Aaron Marcavitch        Executive Director        Housing Nantucket           June 4, 2010
What we aren’t talking about Give you a chance to head for the exits…. Commercial structures, large scale projects Enti...
Housing Nantucket Private, non-profit organization Creating sustainable housing opportunities for Nantucket residents T...
Who we are Grew out of needs for Housing Authority Grew out of perceived issues related to DHCD and    30B bidding   So...
A few examples
What is Affordable Housing? Generally serves those earning below 100% of Area Median Income ($88,900) Housing Needs Cove...
Where do we fit within the government? Housing Nantucket sees itself as a “hole filler” We seek out issues that need res...
Our role in housing Organizational shift as land runs out Need to compact and intensify projects Be a better supporter ...
Affordable and Green? One of the most important connections for advocates and government Create solutions between those ...
Methods for Achieving “Green-ness” From a Governmental Perspective:   Transit Oriented Development   Requirements for S...
Envisioning a Green Community Several criteria can be used Most common criteria is the  LEED “standard” – but plenty  of...
Green Communities State Level program (Green Communities Act)     Loans, rebates, incentives Local Level initiatives  ...
Building Green “The energy required to operate the  heating, cooling, and electrical systems of  the typical American hou...
LEED for Homes A residential level version of LEED for New Construction Less stringent, more responsive Less Cost Same...
Benefits for Government Reduce load on infrastructure   Water reduction   Energy usage reduction   Transportation redu...
Benefits for Developer Value Added Better living environment for tenant Tends to stay in unit longer More responsive t...
But it Costs too much! “...a report commissioned by Californias Sustainable Building Task Force, an upfront  investment o...
Housing Nantucket Projects
Our Projects3 Norquarta Rear                  2 Clarendon Rear
2 Clarendon Rear Conceived as a two bedroom unit Built with Insulated Concrete Form System Intended to be higher qualit...
2 Clarendon Team Initially was CSG, Housing Nantucket, and Andersen  Construction Housing Nantucket’s co-op student prov...
Initial Process As our “guinea pig” project, we  made a few miss steps in the  documentation process. Could have develop...
3 Norquarta Rear Conceived as a one bedroom unit Developed as an infill site Intended to be a construction counterpoint...
3 Norquarta Team Housing Nantucket and an internal project manager    lead project   George Pappas and Matt Maryanski we...
Initial Process Since this was not intended to reach high levels of LEED  ratings, project simply proceeded as regular co...
Used exclusively in 3NorquartaSuggestion from CSGwas to bury lines intofoam so that they wouldbe insulated.               ...
3 Norquarta utilizes a“single point” heatingsystem. A single Rinnaiheater (82% efficient)heats entire home.Jump vent and f...
3 Norquarta utilized itssouthern exposure tobring natural light intothe main living space.Dimmable CFL unitswere used in r...
3 Norquarta usedcabinets fromCorsi/Greenfield whichwere all low-VOC units.Bamboo flooringinstalled by IslandCarpet.       ...
LandscapingUtilized privet to keep units separated,    Minimized disturbed areas, usedbasic landscape design, gray pavers,...
Easy Points Innovation and Design   Think about project before starting Location and Linkages   Plan where you are put...
Problem Areas Water   Runoff from roofs, rain barrels, irrigation, managing water,    erosion   Not Nantucket style iss...
Thank you!       Aaron Marcavitch  aaron@housingnantucket.orghttp://www.housingnantucket.org         508-228-4422
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing

515 views
428 views

Published on

Published in: Real Estate, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
515
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

MAPD 2010 - Green affordable housing

  1. 1. Green Affordable Housing Aaron Marcavitch Executive Director Housing Nantucket June 4, 2010
  2. 2. What we aren’t talking about Give you a chance to head for the exits…. Commercial structures, large scale projects Entire community planning for green We are talking about:  The general process  Individual unit development (homes)  Where the process can work between developers and planning agencies
  3. 3. Housing Nantucket Private, non-profit organization Creating sustainable housing opportunities for Nantucket residents Through three areas of focus:  Rental Services  Homeownership Services  Technical Assistance
  4. 4. Who we are Grew out of needs for Housing Authority Grew out of perceived issues related to DHCD and 30B bidding Sought to fill gaps in housing needs for community Connective tissue between many stakeholders on the island Un-biased, un-related group Seeks to create new partnerships with existing groups and with Town of Nantucket
  5. 5. A few examples
  6. 6. What is Affordable Housing? Generally serves those earning below 100% of Area Median Income ($88,900) Housing Needs Covenant serves those earning up to 150% of AMI The residents are town employees, service workers, construction workers, and health workers. Scattered sites – Surfside, Tom Nevers
  7. 7. Where do we fit within the government? Housing Nantucket sees itself as a “hole filler” We seek out issues that need resolved and fix them Primarily viewed as a developer We provide local level education, local level advocacy Same issues as land conservation advocacy groups  Who are you  Why are you involved in process  You don’t understand the issue We seek to try to provide insight into housing
  8. 8. Our role in housing Organizational shift as land runs out Need to compact and intensify projects Be a better supporter and advocate for Town sponsored initiatives Seek to diversify board Seek to continue to expand partnerships Seek to be an advocate for green methods, better construction methods without bias Develop library and sources of information on green
  9. 9. Affordable and Green? One of the most important connections for advocates and government Create solutions between those who earn less and lowering energy costs Green building doesn’t cost more Opportunity for community consensus and government support of project Opportunity for holistic project management
  10. 10. Methods for Achieving “Green-ness” From a Governmental Perspective:  Transit Oriented Development  Requirements for Smart Growth Principles  Requirements/Goals of Green Certification in RFPs  Participation in planning process From a Non-Profit/Developer Perspective  How much will it cost?  Why do it?  Who will benefit?  What is my return on the investment?
  11. 11. Envisioning a Green Community Several criteria can be used Most common criteria is the LEED “standard” – but plenty of options (Energy Star, Green Globe, NAHB) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Developed by the US Green Building Council
  12. 12. Green Communities State Level program (Green Communities Act)  Loans, rebates, incentives Local Level initiatives  Stick – Regulations requiring building green  Carrot - Local level incentives/ tax breaks Needs for connecting government with developer  Communicate and speak the same language  Look for methods for streamlining permitting or finding more carrots in the process  Seek out innovative methods but understand the financial issues  Seek ways to plan together during project (charettes, etc)
  13. 13. Building Green “The energy required to operate the heating, cooling, and electrical systems of the typical American house for one year generates more than 26,000 pounds of greenhouse gas – enough to fill the Goodyear blimp.” “Green buildings arent just good for people and the environment but, if measured against long enough time frames, they make sound financial investments both in terms of reduced maintenance and operational costs as well as increased worker productivity.” (Or resident retention.)
  14. 14. LEED for Homes A residential level version of LEED for New Construction Less stringent, more responsive Less Cost Same basic areas of concern Uses “accountability forms” from homeowner
  15. 15. Benefits for Government Reduce load on infrastructure  Water reduction  Energy usage reduction  Transportation reduction PR Value Chance to help influence the outcome of the project with a developer Ability to know the “rules” for green developments Better tenants make better communities
  16. 16. Benefits for Developer Value Added Better living environment for tenant Tends to stay in unit longer More responsive to management Less complaints Longer life-cycle for components
  17. 17. But it Costs too much! “...a report commissioned by Californias Sustainable Building Task Force, an upfront investment of two percent of construction costs will typically yield life cycle savings of over ten times the value of the intial investment.” However, most developers arent interested in life cycle savings - it works for homeowners and those in it for the “long haul,” such as affordable housing developers. Studies have shown that cost increases have ranged from -18% to 6% Average cost increase is 2.4% (less than a standard contingency) Most costly additions tend to be innovative design and technologies
  18. 18. Housing Nantucket Projects
  19. 19. Our Projects3 Norquarta Rear 2 Clarendon Rear
  20. 20. 2 Clarendon Rear Conceived as a two bedroom unit Built with Insulated Concrete Form System Intended to be higher quality than typical homes On-island LEED professionals directed to LEED for Homes provider – Conservation Services Group (CSG) Initial meeting was after design was approved and contractor was selected
  21. 21. 2 Clarendon Team Initially was CSG, Housing Nantucket, and Andersen Construction Housing Nantucket’s co-op student provided significant support towards end of project. Hired Bartsch and Radnor as landscape architect Atlantic Landscaping provided landscape work George Hull and Ryder - electricians, Adobe Cinema - energy monitoring system, Dave Kinney - plumber No mechanical engineer
  22. 22. Initial Process As our “guinea pig” project, we made a few miss steps in the documentation process. Could have developed a few more points if the project were submitted to the LEED program prior to selecting a contractor and developing the design. After connecting with CSG, we made a few modifications to project to allow for certain points.
  23. 23. 3 Norquarta Rear Conceived as a one bedroom unit Developed as an infill site Intended to be a construction counterpoint to 2 Clarendon by using stick framing Had preliminary conversations with CSG Project was never intended to reach high level of LEED rating Took lessons from 2 Clarendon
  24. 24. 3 Norquarta Team Housing Nantucket and an internal project manager lead project George Pappas and Matt Maryanski were primary construction team Garry Caruso – plumbing, Ryder Electric – electrical, Mr. T – insulation, Island Concrete – Foundation, Island Carpet – flooring Nantucket Housefitters – kitchen Atlantic Landscaping for landscape construction
  25. 25. Initial Process Since this was not intended to reach high levels of LEED ratings, project simply proceeded as regular construction project During process, CSG technicians provided feedback on certain elements of construction and construction team knew to look for innovative construction methods. Team meeting was held during process, but was not as formal as required under LEED process.
  26. 26. Used exclusively in 3NorquartaSuggestion from CSGwas to bury lines intofoam so that they wouldbe insulated. Spray Foam
  27. 27. 3 Norquarta utilizes a“single point” heatingsystem. A single Rinnaiheater (82% efficient)heats entire home.Jump vent and fan tomove air Heating System
  28. 28. 3 Norquarta utilized itssouthern exposure tobring natural light intothe main living space.Dimmable CFL unitswere used in recessedlighting. CFL/Natural Lighting
  29. 29. 3 Norquarta usedcabinets fromCorsi/Greenfield whichwere all low-VOC units.Bamboo flooringinstalled by IslandCarpet. Materials
  30. 30. LandscapingUtilized privet to keep units separated, Minimized disturbed areas, usedbasic landscape design, gray pavers, turf naturalized plantings, used Nantucket style landscape to blend with neighborhood
  31. 31. Easy Points Innovation and Design  Think about project before starting Location and Linkages  Plan where you are putting your project Site Selection  Have a landscape plan Materials and Resources  Plan how you are going to build the house  Lots of material options  Nantucket gains points for recycling
  32. 32. Problem Areas Water  Runoff from roofs, rain barrels, irrigation, managing water, erosion  Not Nantucket style issues  Not able to obtain points in these areas Landscape Design (Site Selection)  Not usually considered when receiving RFP land  Required more design and attention than other projects Mechanicals (IAQ/Energy)  Lack of certified engineer on island  Some calculations complex
  33. 33. Thank you! Aaron Marcavitch aaron@housingnantucket.orghttp://www.housingnantucket.org 508-228-4422

×