<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
  xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>

<channel>
  <title>Green Options &#187; NAHB</title>
  <link>http://greenoptions.com/tag/nahb</link>
  <description>Posts tagged 'NAHB'</description>
  <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 15:36:45 +0000</pubDate>
  <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
    <title>Can Sprawl be Green?</title>
    <link>http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/05/08/can-sprawl-be-green/</link>
    <comments>http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/05/08/can-sprawl-be-green/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 15:36:45 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Kristin Dispenza</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Site &amp; Development]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/05/08/can-sprawl-be-green/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://greenbuildingelements.com/files/2008/05/national-green-building-standard.jpg" alt="The NAHB and ICC are Working on a New set of Green Building Standards" />In my post of May 6th, &#8220;<a href="http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/05/06/traditional-neighborhood-development-and-leed-go-hand-in-hand/">Traditional Neighborhood Development and LEED Go Hand in Hand</a>,&#8221; I made the point that smart growth and new urbanism are helping give a &#8216;boost&#8217; to green building practices. While conducting research for that article, however, I did find several assertions to the contrary.  So, for the sake of playing devil&#8217;s advocate, I will here take a look at some of those assertions.<!--more--></p>
<p>It seems evident that small houses, situated in walkable neighborhoods, are greener than large homes occupying automobile-dependent sites. The new LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) rating system draws heavily from principles of new urbanism and smart growth. New urbanism includes sustainability as one of its tenets (see <a href="http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/02/21/green-communities-part-1-new-urbanism/">Green Communities, Part 1: New Urbanism</a>), and many of the primary elements of smart growth (<a href="http://www.smartgrowth.org/about/default.asp">as listed on their website</a>) have become synonymous with green:</p>
<ul>
<li>Preserve Open Space, Farmland, Natural Beauty and Critical Environmental Areas</li>
<li>Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices</li>
<li>Strengthen and Direct Development Towards Existing Communities</li>
<li>Take Advantage of Compact Building Design</li>
</ul>
<p>But is density, in fact, a prerequisite for green development?</p>
<p>Wayne A. Lemmon, a planner and real estate economist, argued in his article, &#8220;<a href="http://www.plannersweb.com/sprawl/lemm.html">Can Sprawl be Good</a>,&#8221; that (among other things), &#8220;Concentrating development in areas already served by public facilities makes good sense, but only up to the point where available capacity is fully utilized.&#8221;  </p>
<p>The National Association of Home Builders takes particular exception to the assumptions that underpin LEED. Their online article, &#8220;<a href="http://www.nahb.org/news_details.aspx?newsID=5612">New LEED Certification for Development Found Wanting</a>,&#8221; examines LEED-ND, and proposes that it may actually be inhibiting the progress of green development.  </p>
<p>NAHB land use planner Edward Tombari explains:</p>
<blockquote><p>Based on NAHB&#8217;s experience with smart growth and new urbanism design principles, a majority of the projects being built by developers today that incorporate Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) principles might be able to achieve some lower-level LEED recognition. However, while the number of communities using TND principles is rising, the vast majority do not because TND favors higher density and most new development occurs in suburban and exurban greenfield locations. While this excludes much new development from being eligible to meet the criteria being established by LEED-ND, NAHB believes new development affords many opportunities for implementing green development principles.</p></blockquote>
<p>Even though the notion of returning to &#8216;Main Street America&#8217; seems to have captured the popular imagination, there is no sign that the production of large, detached, single-family homes will actually be coming to a halt anytime soon. (Barbara Faga&#8217;s article  on Planetizen, &#8220;<a href="http://www.planetizen.com/node/30508">Two Things People Hate: Density and Sprawl</a>,&#8221; spurred a lively debate on this topic a few weeks ago.)</p>
<p>So, if urban sprawl is on a roll that cannot yet be stopped, can a neighborhood rating system that prioritizes density accomplish significant change? Many industry professionals believe that the LEED programs in place so far have managed to make a broad impact upon construction practices precisely because they have not set the bar impossibly high. Now the NAHB and the International Code Council are working on their own consensus-based National Green Building Standard, and this standard will be applicable to a wide range of developments, including conventional, suburban ones. (To view progress on the draft Standard, visit the <a href="http://www.nahbrc.org/technical/standards/greenbuilding.aspx">NAHB Research Center site</a>.) If consumers find the National Green Building Standard to be more adaptable than LEED, then perhaps LEED will have met its match in the American marketplace.</p>
<p>Photo Credit: NAHB<br />
 </p>
]]></description>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[In my post of May 6th, "Traditional Neighborhood Development and LEED Go Hand in Hand [1]," I made the point that smart growth and new urbanism are helping give a 'boost' to green building practices. While conducting research for that article, however, I did find several assertions to the contrary.  So, for the sake of playing devil's advocate, I will here take a look at some of those assertions.

[1] http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/05/06/traditional-neighborhood-development-and-leed-go-hand-in-hand/]]></content:encoded>

    <wfw:commentRss>http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/05/08/can-sprawl-be-green/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Patrician Place:  An Experiment in Energy</title>
    <link>http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/04/03/patrician-place-an-experiment-in-energy/</link>
    <comments>http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/04/03/patrician-place-an-experiment-in-energy/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Joel Bittle</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Energy Efficiency]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/04/03/patrician-place-an-experiment-in-energy/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><img src='http://greenbuildingelements.com/files/2008/04/houseconstruction2.jpg' alt='house' /><a href="http://www.themeyercompany.com/">The Meyer Company</a> of St. Louis, Missouri, is quietly undertaking a green building experiment called <a href="http://web.mac.com/garenmiller/PATRICIAN_PLACE_HOMES/Welcome.html">Patrician Place</a>, the results of which could have far reaching implications in the field of green building.  In partnership with the St. Louis County Office of Community Development and Architect; Garen Miller, Inc., The Meyer Company is building ten homes under three different green building programs, gauging the energy efficiency of each.  After a year of testing the energy efficiency of the homes of Patrician Place, an affordable housing development for lower income families, St. Louis County will have a benchmark for future housing projects.  <!--more--></p>
<p>Of the ten homes in Patrician Place, one will be certified LEED-H platinum, one will be certified gold in the NAHB&#8217;s Model Green Building Guidelines, and seven will be ENERGY STAR rated homes with slight variations, such as with or without SIPs, or foam insulation as opposed to spray fiberglass, to name a couple.  The tenth will be the control house, built to standard, non-green building practices.  The layouts of the homes will be identical.  Click <a href="http://web.mac.com/garenmiller/PATRICIAN_PLACE_HOMES/Building_Green_files/EnergyMatrix.pdf">here </a>for the spreadsheet of materials used in the different houses.  </p>
<p>In addition to testing energy used with the help of local utilities companies, project coordinators will survey home owners to factor in their family size and energy practices.  I will update here if and when the results of the Patrician Place study are made public.</p>
<p>Photo: Nick Jackson</p>
]]></description>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[The Meyer Company [1] of St. Louis, Missouri, is quietly undertaking a green building experiment called Patrician Place [2], the results of which could have far reaching implications in the field of green building.  In partnership with the St. Louis County Office of Community Development and Architect; Garen Miller, Inc., The Meyer Company is building ten homes under three different green building programs, gauging the energy efficiency of each.  After a year of testing the energy efficiency of the homes of Patrician Place, an affordable housing development for lower income families, St. Louis County will have a benchmark for future housing projects.  

[1] http://www.themeyercompany.com/
[2] http://web.mac.com/garenmiller/PATRICIAN_PLACE_HOMES/Welcome.html]]></content:encoded>

    <wfw:commentRss>http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/04/03/patrician-place-an-experiment-in-energy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>What&#8217;s the Deal With Big Green Homes?</title>
    <link>http://prestonkoerner.greenoptions.com/2007/03/22/whats-the-deal-with-big-green-homes/</link>
    <comments>http://prestonkoerner.greenoptions.com/2007/03/22/whats-the-deal-with-big-green-homes/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:34:43 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Preston Koerner</dc:creator>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://prestonkoerner.greenoptions.com/2007/03/22/whats-the-deal-with-big-green-homes/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><img src="/files/images/Ecomanor.jpg" border="0" alt="EcoManor.com" width="211" height="158" /><strong>Source: EcoManor.com</strong>First, you have the National Association of Home Builders sponsoring a 4,700+ sf urban loft home, the <a href="http://www.tnah.com/">2007 New American Home</a>, for their annual International Builders Show in Orlando, Florida.  The New American Home is certified green by the Florida Green Building Coalition and uses 73% less energy for heating and cooling and 54% less energy for water heating, compared to a comparable house in a similar climate.  Did I mention it&#39;s 4,700+ sf with a 576 sf, unattached two-car garage and loft?  Occupancy = 3 in America, 13 in Japan.    </p><p>Second, you have Ted Turner&#39;s daughter, Laura Turner Seydel, and her husband, Rutherford Seydel, who just received LEED certification for what appears to be the largest LEED home in the world.  6,000+ sf.  Laura sits on the board of more than a dozen non-profit, environmental organizations, and Rutherford is an environmental attorney.  Must be green.  Rutherford is using his green, lawyer cred to lobby the USGBC to be more lenient with bigger homes saying, &#34;People who can afford to build stately homes tend to adopt revolutionary technologies early. These are the people who can make a huge impact.&#34;  Environmental impact, that is.  The LEED system favors smaller homes, so the rich that live large think the system is designed against them.  </p>]]></description>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[Source: EcoManor.comFirst, you have the National Association of Home Builders sponsoring a 4,700+ sf urban loft home, the 2007 New American Home [1], for their annual International Builders Show in Orlando, Florida.  The New American Home is certified green by the Florida Green Building Coalition and uses 73% less energy for heating and cooling and 54% less energy for water heating, compared to a comparable house in a similar climate.  Did I mention it&#39;s 4,700+ sf with a 576 sf, unattached two-car garage and loft?  Occupancy = 3 in America, 13 in Japan.    Second, you have Ted Turner&#39;s daughter, Laura Turner Seydel, and her husband, Rutherford Seydel, who just received LEED certification for what appears to be the largest LEED home in the world.  6,000+ sf.  Laura sits on the board of more than a dozen non-profit, environmental organizations, and Rutherford is an environmental attorney.  Must be green.  Rutherford is using his green, lawyer cred to lobby the USGBC to be more lenient with bigger homes saying, &#34;People who can afford to build stately homes tend to adopt revolutionary technologies early. These are the people who can make a huge impact.&#34;  Environmental impact, that is.  The LEED system favors smaller homes, so the rich that live large think the system is designed against them.  To Laura and Rutherford&#39;s credit, their big, LEED-certified home, also known as EcoManor [2], is pretty incredible:  rainwater reclamation; geothermal system; low-flow, dual-flush toilets; drought tolerant lawn; formaldehyde-free wheat-board doors; sustainable and reclaimed wood floors; cellulose and soy-based foam attic insulation; electronic energy-usage monitoring; hemp pillows and jute draperies; 27 solar panels and extensive use of the solar tube for natural lighting; and low-VOC paints, varnishes, and sealants.  So the argument goes, if you&#39;re going to go big, you might as well go green in the process.  The 2007 New American Home and EcoManor both have the trademarks of green homes.  They both have that certified piece of paper, too.  But here&#39;s the thing.  That big home may use a lot less energy and water than similar-sized monster homes, or a non-green 2,000 sf home for that matter, but it is not a responsible endeavor.  Think about all the materials that went into such a behemoth.  In many ways, big homes represent the unsustainability of gross commercialization and over-consumption.  Good old fashioned American waste.  If you&#39;re the Cheaper by the Dozen family, a big house might be necessary.  Otherwise, big does not equal green. According to the National Association of Home Builders, the average size of the American home has more than doubled since 1950.  Average size is 2,414 sf.  EcoManor is about 2.5 times bigger than the average American home.  Let&#39;s make sure to standardize big green homes such as EcoManor so in about 2050, we can say we quadrupled the average size of the American home.  See also:EcoManor: A Certifiably Green, Eco-Friendly Mansion [3] [Fortune]2007 New American Home Goes Green in a Big Way [4] [Jetson Green] &#160;

[1] http://www.tnah.com/
[2] http://www.ecomanor.com/
[3] http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/03/19/8402358/index.htm
[4] http://jetsongreen.typepad.com/jetson_green/2007/03/2007_new_americ.html]]></content:encoded>

    <wfw:commentRss>http://prestonkoerner.greenoptions.com/2007/03/22/whats-the-deal-with-big-green-homes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- 251 queries in 0.558 seconds. -->