Email
Favorite
Favorited ×
Download
Embed
Private Content
Copy and paste this code into your blog or website Copy Customize Close
We have emailed the verification/download link to "".
Login to your email and click the link to download the file directly.

To request the link at a different email address, update it here. Close
Validation messages. Success message. Fail message.

Check your bulk/spam folders if you can't find our mail.

+ Follow

SSC2011_Peter Hughes PPT

by National Housing Conference & the Center for Housing Policy on Sep 29, 2011

203 views

More…

Less

Statistics

Favorites: 0
Downloads: 2
Comments: 0
Embed Views: 0
Views on SlideShare: 203
Total Views: 203

One Component of a larger QAP rewrite following the end of ARRA program funding. Without a significant overhaul to the QAP, Michigan was in serious danger of failing to attract LIHTC equity without federal subsidy. It was important that the Authority reviewed ALL aspects of the QAP when this rewrite began to bring all components up to speed. Green was simply a piece of a larger puzzle. The original MSHDA green or “new urbanism” point scoring mechanism was flawed and easily manipulated. There was no standard evaluation protocol or verification methodology. Square peg : Round hole. Prior iterations of the Michigan QAP (GC/NU introduced in 2008 and refined in 2009; Preamble to 2011 QAP created a working group on best practices in green affordable housing and portended a future revamp/rewrite). Additionally, the last state government re-organization merged the SHPO with MSHDA and placed an increased emphasis on the role of historic preservation in affordable housing development – a natural synergy with sustainability initiatives.
Similar to a design charrette, a process was proposed to include parties interested in the QAP development. These included: For profit & non-profit developers Project development teams Architects Engineers Property Mgmt Environmental Consultants Industry trade associations Michigan Housing Council – State lobby for affordable housing development, preservation and property mgmt Great Lakes Capital Fund – tax credit syndicator based in Lansing, MI with operations throughout the Midwest
MSHDA Staff developed a guiding principle for the focus group discussions in order to promote healthy, green, and sustainable building practices within the QAP: Design policies within the QAP that incentivize and reward developers for the planning and development of affordable housing that incorporates the most current green building practices and enables Authority staff to reliably determine compliance prior to the issuance of IRS Form 8609. Technical complexity necessitates transparency – which rating system(s); what type of housing (elderly or family; tower or campus; rehab or NC). One size DOES NOT fit all.
Because MSHDA’s mission and vision statements contemplate the creation and preservation of affordable housing that sustains communities and improves quality of life for Michigan’s low and moderate-income residents, three main objectives for the QAP Green Policy were identified: 1. Encourage/Incentivize: provide appropriate incentives to developers to incorporate sensible green criteria that reduces resource consumption, improves water and energy use efficiency, and improves resident health. Sustainable Development Preservation of Affordable Housing – rehab preferred to NC, Brownfield preferred to Greenfield 2. Connect to National Standard(s) – LEED Rating System(s) & Enterprise Foundation Green Communities 3. Verification/Evaluation – By connecting to third party standards the responsibility for administrative review was shifted to those persons with green building expertise and away from LIHTC allocation staff at MSHDA.
Deciding what to keep and what to scrap: Clear preference for green compliance “options” Delineate NC/Preservation/Adaptive Reuse but make addt’l point level Implement a baseline “MSHDA standard” that is seamless with national standards as mandatory. Addt’l points for certification. Leaving the door open to future improvements/updates: LEED and Green Communities are dynamic and future updates will be more easily synchronized into future iterations of the Michigan QAP. By placing an emphasis on verification and evaluation MSHDA hopes to identify pilot projects for data collection
A Brief Overview: Designed as a “baseline” to seamlessly integrate with both LEED & Green Communities. Low hanging fruit: Minimize Greenfield development Native Landscaping & Efficient Irrigation Water conserving fixtures Energy Efficient – appliances, lighting (indoor/outdoor), HVAC & HWH, Metering Low/No VOC’s Energy Star rated bathroom ventilation O&M – Recycling facilities and resident/staff operating manuals

SSC2011_Peter Hughes PPT — Presentation Transcript

Developing a Green Policy for the State of Michigan QAP SOLUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES 2011 LEARNING CONFERENCE ON STATE & LOCAL HOUSING POLICY WASHINGTON, DC | SEPTEMBER 26-28, 2011 SESSION 3.2: Effectively Using Green Rating Systems & Standards
Why Green, Why Now? LaVogue Square Apartments | Detroit, MI
Engaging Stakeholders DEVELOPERS ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS CONSTRUCTION MGMT. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS PROPERTY MGMT. INDUSTRY TRADE ASSOCIATIONS
Process Transparency & Expediency = TRANSPARENCY TRUST ACCOUNTABILITY COOPERATION EQUILIBRIUM
Three Overarching Goals
Something is better than nothing
MSHDA’s Green Policy
- LOCATION
- SITE IMPROVEMENTS
- WATER CONSERVATION
- ENERGY EFFICIENCY
- MATERIALS USE
- HEALTHY LIVING ENVIRONMENT
- OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Questions?
- Peter Hughes, LEED®AP
- Michigan State Housing Development Authority
- [email_address]
- MSHDA 2012 QAP Green Policy

SSC2011_Peter Hughes PPT

by National Housing Conference & the Center for Housing Policy on Sep 29, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

SSC2011_Peter Hughes PPT — Presentation Transcript