 |
Roundtable on
Sustainability I: Housing
The American Institute of
Architects
Washington, D.C.
October 25–26, 2004
A National Discussion Begins
The American Institute of Architects’ first Roundtable on
Sustainable Design brought together representatives of nearly two
dozen agencies and organizations with a shared concern:
sustainability in residential design and community development. The
33 participants spoke from the wide-ranging perspectives of
professionals representing building-industry groups; architects;
and an array of environmental, planning, housing, and governmental
agencies and organizations.
By the end of the roundtable—held October 25-26 at the AIA
National Component offices in Washington, D.C.—attendees had
found common ground and had begun to forge a new network for
meeting the common challenges in pursuit of the oft-cited three
central aspects of sustainability: economy, ecology, and equity. As
keynote speaker Karl Bren, principal of GreenVisions Consulting,
told the group, “The nonprofit community was created on the
[social] equity side, and most businesses are created to make a
profit—the economy side. All of them need to put in the
ecology element as part of what they do.”
The ideas, consensus, and collaboration fostered by the October
roundtable, which focused on housing sustainability, are the first
fruits of a new two-year program managed by the AIA Center for
Communities by Design, in conjunction with several AIA knowledge
communities, to establish and document a broad understanding of
diverse issues related to sustainable communities. The next
roundtable—to be held December 13 in Washington,
D.C.—will focus on economic aspects of sustainability. Future
roundtables will focus on environmental, historic-preservation, and
other design and development issues relating to sustainable design.
Collectively, the six-roundtable series will serve to establish a
leadership network and develop a national agenda, culminating in a
national, AIA-sponsored symposium on sustainable design scheduled
for Fall 2006.
As several participants noted, the architecture profession—and
the AIA in particular—may be able to play a unique role in
furthering a sustainable-design agenda in both the public and
private sectors. Because architects represent, for many audiences,
a “status” profession and because diverse professional
disciplines view the AIA as an honest broker, the Institute has an
opportunity to lend an independent, credible voice to this national
discussion.
“The AIA could be a really good bridge between the
environmental community and the development community,” said
Walker Wells, program director of Global Green USA’s
R.E.S.C.U.E. (Resource Efficiency & Sustainable Communities for
the Urban Environment) program. The Institute’s involvement
with both the environmental and development sides of the equation
put it in a great position to encourage consensus on issues related
to sustainability and to convey that consensus to diverse
stakeholders, he said.
For architects, as 2004 AIA First Vice President Douglas L. Steidl,
FAIA, told the group, sustainability “not only has to do with
our values; it has to do with practicality.” On the values
side, the Institute’s public policies recognize the value of
collaboration, responsibility for the quality of the built
environment, and responsibility to the natural
environment—and, thus, to the sustainability of that
environment. On the practical side, as an Urban Land Institute
gathering this year emphasized, sustainable-design practices hold
the potential to reduce the costs of building and community
projects alike, Steidl said.
Common Ground, Common Challenges
On a general level, these are values that roundtable attendees
could easily agree upon. The challenge is in developing the
data-backed information and unified messages that demonstrate and
convey the true costs of poor design (e.g., continued sprawl,
excessive resource use, and pollution) and the true benefits of
sustainable design and green-building practices.
Among the initial challenges is to agree upon a commonly understood
definition of “sustainability” and related terms. The
need to develop a common vocabulary of sustainable
design—while avoiding reliance on jargon and terms with
negative connotations—was a recurrent theme of the
roundtable.
One of the leading efforts to both define and codify the
“green building” part of the equation has been the U.S.
Green Building Council’s (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEEDTM) Green Building Rating System®.
Now a decade old, LEED certification will soon be extended from
commercial buildings to homes (LEED-H). Also soon to be released is
the newest certification program, LEED-ND (Neighborhood
Development), which seeks to develop a national standard for
neighborhood design that integrates the principles of green
building and smart growth. LEED-ND, which would certify and reward
development that is both smart and green, involves a partnership of
the USGBC, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the
Congress for the New Urbanism.
In addition, the Top Ten Green Projects competition, sponsored by
the AIA Committee on the Environment and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) ENERGY STAR® Program, has raised
the profile of green building and helped to demonstrate its
benefits through recognition of high-performance, energy-conscious
and environmentally responsible design by U.S. licensed
architects.
Attempts to quantify and certify the broad area of sustainability,
however, take in much more than environmental
sustainability—the range of green design and building
practices to minimize the impact of buildings on the environment
(e.g., energy and resource efficiency, optimizing and minimizing
material use, and place-based design in which the design and
construction relates to local and regional resources). Other parts
of the equation are economic sustainability (e.g., affordability,
minimizing public-service and infrastructure expenditures); and
social sustainability (i.e., meeting the needs of a growing,
changing, and diverse population of all income levels). These
components of sustainability, on a community level, result in
livability (how well a community promotes human health and
well-being, e.g., through walkability, green spaces, multiuse
development, transit options, and an overall sense of
community).
Moreover, although sustainable design may be implemented on a
project-by-project basis, it will occur within a regional
marketplace with regional issues and natural systems that must be
addressed, said David Downey, Assoc. AIA, managing director of the
AIA Center for Communities by Design. “I think we will always
be challenged to make that link between the individual project in
the community and that regional perspective,” whether in the
course of building relationships with local elected officials or in
getting the word out about community design. “The regional
nature of sustainability can be used as an underlying concept for
our discussion,” Downey said.
Roundtable participants identified several common challenges in the
quest for sustainability in all its aspects:
• Lack of clear-cut answers to the question, “What does
“green” cost?” amid false assumptions that
sustainable or green design costs more than traditional design or
that rehab costs more than new construction
• Widespread resistance to the “D” word:
density
• NIMBYism (“Not In My Back Yard!” opposition) in
regard to affordable (especially rental) housing and dense
development
• Insufficient investment in affordable housing across a range
of incomes
• Building permits, codes, and zoning ordinances that ease the
way for sprawl and traditional construction while subjecting
anything varying from the norm to uncertainty and delays
• Undeveloped consumer expectations concerning green
building
• Rapid population growth and demographic changes that
existing housing stocks cannot accommodate
• Insufficient data-driven market research and case studies to
demonstrate benefits of sustainable design and development
• Lack of a central clearinghouse for emerging areas of
consensus, resources, best practices, case studies and other data
about sustainability
• Tensions in reconciling the interests of diverse
constituencies: environmentalists, affordable-housing groups,
planners, builders, developers, architects, zoning officials, and
others
• Land-acquisition and land-use issues such as school location
and construction standards that make walkable neighborhoods
impossible.
Cost factors underlie many if not most of the other challenges. Yet
sustainability advocates should focus on the value of
sustainability, not just costs, when promoting green building
practices in the market-driven housing field, said Ray Tonjes,
chair of the Green Building Subcommittee of the National
Association of Home Builders (NAHB). Tonjes, a home builder in
Austin, Tex., said the biggest challenge is to empower the people
on the job, such as subcontractors, by addressing the cost of
materials so that green building practices can be
mainstreamed.
“We need to start . . . with the easy things first and build
upon that,” Tonjes said, citing a recent builders-show
presentation by Austin architect Peter L. Pfeiffer,
FAIA—“Mainstreaming Green: Utilizing the Low-Hanging
Fruit”—that provided some basic, useful tips for easily
integrating green practices into any building project.
“There are so many things about green building that don’t
cost anything,” Tonjes said. Utility and lender incentives are
needed as a seed, to begin a success that perpetuates itself. An
NAHB pilot program to reduce energy costs by working with local
utilities increases value to the builder while decreasing costs
through an interest-rate reduction by the lender. “They say in
our profession it takes 18 to 20 years to have a market
transformation,” Tonjes said. “We think we can accelerate
that process.”
Changing Market Forces and Demographics: Opportunities and
Issues
Even “market-driven” is a term up for redefinition
because the U.S. housing market itself is already undergoing
transformation based on projected population growth and demographic
changes. “We’re moving into a world—in terms of the
forces shaping our housing market—that is very different from
the world we have experienced and worked in” over the last 20
to 30 years, said David Dixon, FAIA, a member of the AIA Regional
and Urban Design Committee and a principal of Goody Clancy who
leads the Boston architecture firm’s Planning and Urban Design
division.
These changes may be good news for the growth of sustainable design
and development, Dixon pointed out. “The demographic and
market conditions that drive how we house more people over the next
50 years will be entirely different from the past 50 years. . . .
Builders are looking for leadership about what houses will be
needed. This creates tremendous opportunity to guide products for
this market demand.” Dixon cited the following facts:
• The U.S. population is expected to double, growing by 140
million over the next 50 years.
• Seventy percent of U.S. households today do not include
children, the inverse of household composition 50 years ago.
• The 20 million U.S. households that do include children,
over the next 20 years, will represent a more even age distribution
than in the past but greater income-bracket fragmentation (i.e.,
the wealth gap is getting bigger).
• In the 1980s through mid-1990s, baby boomers aged 35 to 45
with kids dominated the housing market. Housing demand by age has
recently evened out, and each adult age cohort now spends about the
same amount on housing.
• Real-estate investments in core U.S. urban areas were
volatile from the mid-1960s to the late 1980s, but after the
late-1980s recession, investments in core “24-hour”
cities appreciated 25 percent more than investments in “edge
cities” and were the least volatile.
Housing in the United States, while primarily market-driven, is
definitely behind the demographic curve, said Ed McMahon of the
Urban Land Institute, where he is the ULI/Charles Fraser Senior
Resident Fellow for Sustainable Development. With 70 percent of the
population base without children, many “would love to live in
a walkable community, but builders are building developments as
though everyone is still the Waltons,” McMahon said. The
changing ethnic makeup of the population will also drive demand for
different choices than the market has previously provided, he
noted.
The implications of market and demographic changes for sustainable
development may be promising in some respects. Other trends,
however, have troubled those working in the affordable housing
field—especially regarding affordable rental housing. NIMBYism
comes most into play in response to any such development plans,
even for senior rental housing, said Greta Harris, senior program
director of the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) in
Richmond, Va., one of 35 LISC offices throughout the country. LISC
provides grants, loans, and equity investments to Community
Development Corporations (CDCs) for redevelopment of low-income
neighborhoods and rural areas.
As cuts in both state and federal public funding come into play,
collaboration among housing interest groups and partnerships with
the private sector become even more crucial—as does a return
to greater density in community development. Density is a core
issue, roundtable participants agreed.
“Most people have been reluctant to really deal with issues
around density,” said Julia Seward, LISC’s director of
state policy in Washington, D.C. The “D” word, as she
called it, “is the kiss of death” when it comes to
discussions about community redevelopment. One CDC helped to
develop a downtown Cleveland neighborhood, marketing it as a
sustainable, green community, Seward said. The type of housing
created, however, was suburban in character, complete with
driveways, so the renewal did not occur at the most appropriate
level of density.
Dixon believes that attitudes about density can change—and are
beginning to change already. “The need to discuss urban
density is essential. If you can’t get people to live in more
compact patterns, you can’t achieve much more” in terms
of sustainability, he said, especially at a time when the tax base
and the environment cannot sustain more low-density, sprawling
development. The economic pressures and strains on infrastructure
will help people to see that well-designed, denser communities
attract investment and can be in their self-interest, he
said.
That conversation inevitably involves architects and planners who
know about how good design imparts a sense of community.
“Density without amenity will generate opposition every
time,” McMahon said, noting that density can provide the
revenue stream that provides for the amenities (e.g., parks,
attractive streetscapes, and accessible transportation systems).
“Cookie-cutter development at any density generates
opposition. Community at any density generates support.”
Joining Forces: Bringing Sustainable Design into the
Mainstream
Sustainable design that integrates smart growth, green building
practices, and the creation of affordable housing choices will
require effective collaboration to counter the challenges and take
advantage of the opportunities. Only leadership that keeps all
parties focused on common interests, Dixon said, can resolve the
inevitable tensions arising from collaboration (for example, the
need to accept the environmental impact of some development to
avoid greater impact in other areas).
Much of the discussion focused on how the roundtable attendees and
others joining this effort can form an effective leadership network
and best exert such leadership. Proposed solutions to the
challenges ahead could be categorized within three basic areas:
communication and education; collaboration and partnerships; and
public policy changes.
Communication and education. An emerging network
for sustainable design might have the quickest impact through the
consensus it develops and communication of that consensus through
consistent marketing and lobbying to relevant industries, decision
makers, organizations, and consumers. This kind of education would
be the foundation for reshaping the marketing conversation to
emphasize the value of the sustainable design of housing.
This communication effort should include the effective marketing of
existing efforts that will attract local, national and
international media coverage and support. For example, Habitat for
Humanity in Atlanta is building 100-percent green homes, said James
Hackler, program manager of USGBC’s LEED-Homes initiative.
“When people find out about this, they get excited,” he
said. Playing the “environmental/nonprofit card” is a
good way to attract media coverage and even other forms of support.
For instance, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution donated free ad
pages to promote green building.
Another component is demonstration of the value of sustainable
design through development and dissemination of data-driven
research, best practices, and case studies. From the many
sustainable-design and green-building efforts across the country,
“many more case studies exist than we’re aware of,”
said Sandra Leibowitz Earley, principal of Sustainable Design
Consulting in Annapolis, Md., and one of two roundtable
facilitators. The Department of Energy’s High-Performance
Building case studies is just one source of the kind of information
that can be mined and communicated.
One of the most important aspects of a comprehensive education
effort will be peer-to-peer communication within constituencies
such as architects, builders, and realtors. For example, a builder
telling another builder about a successful experience with green
building, conveying its value in common terms, simply helps success
to build upon success.
Collaboration and partnerships. The networking and
collaboration forged by a series of high-level roundtables can
harness the power and models of numerous grassroots efforts for a
total effort that will be greater than the sum of its parts. A
primary goal of the roundtables is to develop a leadership model
that empowers all participants and can be sustained, said Bill
Roschen, AIA, member of the AIA Housing Committee Advisory Group
and roundtable facilitator.
“We’re gonna win this,” said Bren of GreenVisions in
his keynote address. “You know why? Because there are
thousands of small, grassroots organizations that are doing this.
It’s not top-down. It’s bubbling up.” Collaboration
is now required to help that spreading movement reach critical
mass, he said.
One of the many collaborative efforts that roundtable attendees
agreed upon would be creation of a central clearinghouse for data
about sustainability, including research, case studies, and
resources that would share knowledge with all other participants in
the effort.
Another focus is to build and leverage partnerships in support of
sustainability. For example, AARP is getting increasingly involved
in issues of housing and transportation affordability and
availability for midlife and older Americans, said Jane King, the
organization’s manager of housing options and livable
communities. AARP’s commitment in this area makes it a
valuable ally, especially as a lobbying force with public
officials, said Martin Harris, director of the Center for
Sustainable Communities of the National Association of Counties
(NACO). “AARP has the power to touch my people where they live
and get them to move the ball,” Harris said.
Public policy changes. Finally, the long-term goal
of shaping political will and embedding sustainability in the law
(e.g., codes and permitting processes) will be essential to any
lasting progress, many roundtable participants remarked. As
interested groups pursue sustainability as part of a sustained
political and legislative agenda, progress will inevitably
follow.
“Developers can and will supply what is required as long as
the requirements are uniformly applicable,” said Karina Ricks,
an at-large director of the American Planning Association’s
National Capital Area Chapter. “The baseline needs to be
raised” to address market concerns and create
consistency.
NACO and NAHB are also on board with this and have begun discussing
a process of precertification for green building to diminish if not
eliminate uncertainty and to expedite processes for builders and
developers that want to construct sustainable developments, said
Harris of NACO. Permitting requirements and local development
standards would also need to change, but the overall goal is to
reduce financial, legal, and regulatory burdens on developers who
want to change the status quo.
Whether through better market incentives, education, partnerships,
or political action, the goal is to get sustainable design into the
mainstream, roundtable participants agreed. As Bren put it,
“We need to get it so this is practiced, and this is simply
the kind of housing we build.” At that point, consumers might
ask, “Why would you even build me a house that’s not
energy-efficient?”
Despite the challenges, the roundtable attendees are among the many
thousands of people involved in housing and sustainability issues
who are motivated by a sense that in the end, sustainable design,
almost by definition, is a win-win proposition. “We need to
insist on better design. We need to not allow bad design—which
we know isn’t wanted by consumers,” Bren said.
“Beauty and good design are sustainable, essential
qualities.”
Building on the foundation of this first Roundtable on Sustainable
Design, the collaborative effort continues on December 13, 2004,
when the second roundtable in the series will focus on sustainable
economic opportunities, emphasizing regional and urban design. The
AIA will again host this discussion at its offices in Washington,
D.C.
|
