Green Building Law Update : Green Building & Construction LEED AP, Lawyer & Attorney Chris Cheatham : Washington DC, Virginia, New York City

The Washington D.C. government has recently began incorporating Social Media 2.0 into its public outreach.  Agencies have Facebook pages, some are on Twitter and officials have even taken to participating in online chats with the public. 

I was very excited to learn that Councilmember Mary Cheh was conducting one of these online chats last Friday.  Cheh is the chairperson of the Committee on Government Operations and the Environment and very interested in the operation of the D.C. Green Building Act of 2006.  You may recall that I spoke at a D.C. Public Hearing on Green Building that was convened by Councilmember Cheh.  During the hearing, Cheh demanded accountability from those responsible for implementing the Act. 

After reading the chat, I am optimistic about the future of green building regulations in the District: 

1:37    [Comment From SG]
How can the DC government incentivize "green roofs" for private citizens to make it extremely cost-effective for average citizens and businesses to install?

1:41    Mary Cheh:  We are moving to do just that. The RiverSmart program, by DDOE, provides grants for mitigation of storm water outflow at residential properties. It could be used for green roofs. Anyone interested should check out the DDOE website at ddoe.dc.gov. Unfortunately, at the moment, for our businesses, we don't have much by way of incentives and we are relying more on a stick approach, which will make it more expensive for businesses if they fail to deal with water runoff. DDOE has a Business Outreach specialist who can offer advice on strategies for green roofs and other environmental initiatives.

Cheh's comment that it is "unfortunate" that there are not more incentives for green roofs has me optimistic that Cheh also supports further incentives for green building development.  The problem Cheh faces, of course, is that Washington, D.C. has very limited funds for incentive programs. 

So here's my proposed plan:  the D.C. Feebate.  Modeled after the Portland Feebate, D.C. could set up a separate green building fund.  If a project fails to achieve LEED certification or equivalent, the project pays a fee into the city fund.  If a project achieves LEED Certified or Silver certification, nothing happens.  Here's the kicker:  if a project achieves LEED Gold or Platinum, the project will get a rebate back from the fund. 

What do you think?
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Continuing our discussion of topics from Greenbuild, we now move to Los Angeles’ green building regulation.  We have already highlighted Portland’s innovative Feebate enforcement mechanism.  Los Angeles has created a very different enforcement mechanism that, frankly, may cause problems. 

Under Los Angeles’ Green Building Program Standard of Sustainability, projects meeting certain size requirements must:  (1) include a LEED AP on the project and (2) demonstrate that the project has met the intent of the USGBC’s LEED certified level.  Importantly, Los Angeles’ Standard of Sustainability states that “formal certification by the USGBC is not required.” 

Los Angeles’ plan to enforce the Standard differs significantly from other regulatory schemes and includes the following steps:

1. Developers must submit plans and a preliminary LEED checklist to the Department of Building and Safety (DBS);
2. DBS will then refer an applicant that meets the sustainability requirements to the Department of City Planning for clearance; and
3. Every seventh project is then audited to ensure compliance with LEED certification.

The Standard never states the punishment if a project fails an audit.  Absent a sufficiently punitive fine for failed audits, owners may be willing to gamble that they will not be audited.  Furthermore, the Standard does not include any provision to ensure that green building strategies are incorporated into actual construction.  Owners can simply eliminate green building strategies after the design phase and avoid punishment. 

Which system do you prefer, Portland’s Feebate or Los Angeles’ Audits? 

Related Links: 

• Building A Green Los Angeles (PDF)
• A Tale of Two Cities: Portland's Feebate (GBLU)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks (1)
• Share Link

 Continuing our posts from GreenBuild, our next two posts will discuss two very different green building regulatory enforcement mechanisms from two very different cities.  The first city, Portland, has created a very innovative enforcement mechanism to enforce its stringent green building regulations. 

Portland is very similar to other cities in that they will require specific project to achieve varying LEED certification levels.  Portland's enforcement mechanism, however, is much different.  Called a "Feebate," Portland will require that some projects pay into a green building fund while other projects obtain rebates from the city.

Under the Feebate system, all new buildings built to code are assessed a fee.  If a project is built to LEED Silver, then the fee is waived and the owner obtains access to financing options.  Even better, if a project attains LEED Gold, the city writes the project owner a check! 

All money that is paid into the green building fund is used either for the incentives or to educate about green building.

Pretty neat, don't you think?  After the Holidays, Portland is coming out with its economic analysis of the plan, and I am looking forward to reviewing it with you. 

Photo Credit:  Scott_rtw

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks (4)
• Share Link