Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market

SmartMarket Report

Premier Partner: Partners: ■ Design and Construction Intelligence SmartMarket Report

McGraw Hill Construction Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: President Growth in a Recovering Market Kathryn E. Cassino SmartMarket Report About McGraw Hill McGraw Hill Construction Executive Editor Research & Analytics/ Harvey M. Bernstein, F.ASCE, LEED AP Construction Industry Insights & Alliances McGraw Hill Construction’s data, Editorial Director analytics, and media businesses— Vice President, Industry Michele A. Russo, LEED AP Insights & Alliances Dodge, Sweets, Architectural Record, Harvey M. Bernstein, F.ASCE, LEED AP Managing Editor and Engineering News-Record— Donna Laquidara-Carr, LEED AP create opportunities for owners, Senior Director, Research & Analytics Burleigh Morton Senior Director, architects, engineers, contractors, Head of Marketing building product manufacturers, Director, Research Communications William Taylor and distributors to strengthen their Michele A. Russo, LEED AP Creative Manager, Media market position, size their markets, Juan Ramos prioritize prospects, and target and Reproduction or dissemination build relationships that will win more of any information contained Art Director business. McGraw Hill Construction herein is granted only by contract Alison Lorenz serves more than one million or prior written permission from Contributing Art Director customers through its trends and McGraw Hill Construction. AD-BOUTIQUE, INC. Terumasa Yamada forecasts, industry news, and leading platform of construction data, Copyright © 2014, benchmarks, and analytics. McGraw Hill Construction, Contributors ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Bruce Buckley To learn more, David Sokol visit www.construction.com. Research Project Manager Dana Gilmore, MRA, PRC

For further information on this SmartMarket Report or for any in the series, please contact: McGraw Hill Construction Research & Analytics 34 Crosby Drive, Suite 201 Bedford, MA 01730 1-800-591-4462 [email protected] SmartMarket Report

Introduction

n 2014, McGraw Hill Construction more than 90% of their projects green). That Dodge estimates that single family percentage is already at 19%, and by 2018, it and multifamily housing projects will is expected to double (to 38%). account for about 45% of the value Market Home builders and remodelers in both the g Iof construction projects started in the single family and multifamily sectors report United States, with single family housing that the market is recognizing the value of making up the lion’s share of the residential green: 73% of single family builders (up

ecoverin projects. For green building to transform

R from 61% since the last report) and 68% of the construction industry fully, the housing Harvey M. Bernstein multifamily builders say consumers will F.ASCE, LEED AP

in a market must be a core part of its growth. Vice President

h pay more for green homes. Since 2006, McGraw Hill Construction Industry Insights & Alliances Greater consumer interest has has been researching green building activity McGraw Hill Construction contributed to the ongoing growth, in the residential market and continually

: Growt: leading us to anticipate that by 2016, the s expanding the scope of the research e green single family housing market alone m based on the way the market has evolved. will represent 26%–33% of the market, In the 2012 New and Remodeled Green translating to a $80 billion to $101 billion ily Hoily Homes SmartMarket Report, we included

m opportunity based on current forecasts.

a remodelers because of their increased

F The findings also suggest that the lack of share of home building activity during the le recognition of the value of green by lenders g recession. And now, given the explosive and appraisers may be decreasing as an growth in the last couple of years in the obstacle due to more documentation of the multifamily sector, the research includes a value of green homes. look at the multifamily market. Michele A. Russo The study also reveals a vigorous and LEED AP ily andily Sin The findings in this report demonstrate Director m growing renewables market in the residen- that green building is increasingly important Green Content & Research tial sector. 65% of the respondents—both in the single family and multifamily sectors. Communications single family and multifamily—currently McGraw Hill Construction ■■62% of those building new single family use renewables on at least some of their homes report that they are doing more projects, and the percentage that incorpo- than 15% of their projects green. By 2018, rate them in all of their projects is expected GreenMultifa that percentage increases to 84%. to grow from 8% in 2013 to 20% by 2016. ■■54% of those building new multifamily We are thrilled to be partnering again on projects report that they are doing more this important research with the National than 15% of their projects green. There is Association of Home Builders, and we thank also growth expected—with that percent- Waste Management and Menck Windows age rising to 79% by 2018. for their support as well, enabling us to ■■In the single family market, the most striking continue to inform the industry about this shift is in those dedicated to green (doing crucial market.

Harvey M. Bernstein, covering innovation and Michele A. Russo, LEED sustainability. Previously, F.ASCE, LEED AP has been sustainability and currently AP, has been working in she served as Executive a leader in the engineering serves as a member of the environmental policy and Director of the Clean Beaches and construction industry for Princeton University Civil and communications for more Council and Deputy Director over 30 years. Currently, he Environmental Engineering than 18 years. She currently of the National Pollution has lead responsibilities for Advisory Council and the serves as MHC’s Director of Prevention Roundtable. She MHC’s market research group, National Building Museum Green Content & Research has authored several articles including MHC’s thought Board of Trustees. He is a Communications, where she around pollution prevention leadership initiatives in visiting professor with the is responsible for helping and toxics reduction, and has areas such as green building, University of Reading’s School direct the green content spoken at a number of events BIM, information mobility, of Construction Management across MHC’s portfolio on green building trends and innovation and global and Engineering in England. of products and services, environmental policy. Russo construction markets. Prior Bernstein has an M.B.A. from including the management has a Masters in public to joining MHC, Bernstein Loyola College, an M.S. in of MHC’s SmartMarket policy from Harvard served as President and engineering from Princeton Report series. Russo is University’s Kennedy School CEO of the Civil Engineering University and a B.S. in civil also a strong contributor of Government and a B.S. in Research Foundation. He has engineering from the New to McGraw Hill Financial’s chemical engineering from written numerous papers Jersey Institute of Technology. corporate initiatives around Cornell University.

McGraw Hill Construction 1 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market table of contents 4 Executive Summary 4 Executive Summary 6 Recommendations

7 Data

7 Introduction

8 sidebar Green Growth Remains Steady During Single Family Market Boom

9 Green Residential Building Market 9 Level of New Green Home Building and Multifamily Project Activity 10 Level of Green Remodeling Activity 11 Green Affordable Housing 14 Green Senior Housing 15 Average Cost to Incorporate Green Features and Practices in New Homes, Multifamily Buildings and Remodeling Projects 16 Willingness of Customers to Pay for Green 18 Ease in the Marketing of Green Homes

19 Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects 19 Why Customers Request Green Homes, Condominiums and Apartments 20 Triggers for Green Building Activity 23 Impact of Incentives and Regulations on Increasing Green Building Activity 24 Obstacles to Increased Green Building Activity 27 sidebar Appraisers and Lenders: Capturing the Value of Green

28 Green Residential Building Practices and Features 28 Most Important Green Practices for New Homes, Multifamily Buildings and Remodeling Projects 29 Features That Make Residential Buildings Greener Than Two Years Ago 30 Most Effective Terminology When Communicating With Customers About Green Features 33 Green Products and Practices Overview 34 Use of Energy Efficiency 36 Importance of Energy Efficiency 38 Use of Materials and Resource Conservation 40 Importance of Materials and Resource Conservation 41 Use of Water Conservation Practices 42 Importance of Water Conservation 43 Use of Practices That Improve Indoor Environmental Quality 44 Importance of Indoor Environmental Quality 45 Use of Lot Design and Development 45 Importance of Lot Design and Development 46 sidebar Growing Public Awareness and Industry Resources Increase the Potential for More Healthy Homes Cover:Bernstein Associates; Opposite page left: Bernstein Associates; Opposite page right: Bob Fortner Photography

SmartMarket Report McGraw Hill Construction 2 www.construction.com Front Cover and Left: This affordable green multifamily project in New York City includes a focus on health and occupant well- being and features a 10,000 sq.ft. roof-top greenhouse that provides produce year- round, 40% of which is consumed locally.

Below: A green renovation project in North Carolina seeks to emphasize daylighting in the home.

47 Use of Renewable Energy 47 Use of Renewable Energy in Residential Projects 49 Most Effective Messages When Marketing Residential Renewable Energy Features 50 sidebar Net-Zero Homes

51 Green Building Products 51 Trusted Sources of Information on Green Building Practices and Products 52 Ability to Name a Top-of-Mind Green Product Manufacturer or Brand 53 Top of Mind Green Brands

56 Green Ratings 56 Awareness and Use of Green Building Product Ratings 58 Awareness and Use of Green Building Certification 59 Green Professional Credentials Held

Case Studies

12 Improving Health in an Affordable Green Multifamily Project: Arbor House, South Bronx, New York

31 Creating and Energy-Efficient and Affordable Home After Hurricane Katrina: Affordable Coastal Cottage, Bay Saint Louis, Mississippi

54 Improving Homeowner Quality of Life Through Green Remodeling: Heritage Hills Whole-House Remodeling Project, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

60 Methodology

61 Resources

McGraw Hill Construction 3 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Executive Summary M to be competitive. the future, with homes increasingly needing to be green family home market to become even greener in T remodelers, green is becoming the standard way to build. builders, and increasingly among single family that level by 2018. 90% of their projects green) in 2013, 18% expect to be at builders report being dedicated to green (more than be at that level by 2015. their projects green in 2011 to only 21% who expect to multifamily builders—from 69% doing less than 16% of least a moderate level of green building is reported by A dramatic shift in the number of companies doing at percentage are already at the 90% level of green building. doing more than 60% of their work green, and half of that high levels of green engagement—18% are currently is how many single family remodelers are also reporting the ICC 700 National Green Building Standard or other credible rating system. rating or credible other Standard Building Green National 700 the ICC with comply would that or projects education and homeowner air quality; indoor improved waterandefficiency; energy efficiency; resource site planning; sensitive environmentally asincorporates one that In was defined study, this a home green specializing in green. increase, but that multifamily builders in general are not widespread in the multifamily sector and is expected to some experience with green building is becoming more in those reporting more than 90% of their work as green. green involvement. green, and by 2018, 62% anticipate being at that level of homes are currently doing 60% or more of their projects Over one third (34%) of those building new single family Family Single Green Increasingly Becoming Paths Toward Take Different Sectors Family Multifamily and Single the in Remodelers and Developers Builders, those doing single family housing in terms of their drivers, marketing studyefforts and paintsgeneral a approachfuller to portrait greenof building.residential green building and the crucial waysthrough in comparisonswhich withmultifamily previous firmsstudies differfrom from 2006 through 2011. T experience. green in bifurcation a to led has market intothe of new firms entry but the recovery the during grow to continues construction residential Green Report SmartMarket his wider adoption of green may help push the single he findings of thisstudy reveal the evolution of green building for single family homesfrom boom to bust to recovery ulti T T hese findings demonstrate that among home he biggest change from the findings of the 2011study f amily amily T his suggests that knowledge of and By 2018, the biggest shift is expected

T hough only 6% of multifamily Construction Hill McGraw

(Builders (Builders of Involvement in Over Activity Green Time (Builders of Involvement in Over Activity Green Time 2_2_Market_MFGreenAct_Q6_#03.ep 2_1_Market_SFGreenAct_Q6_#02.ep Source: McGra Source: Source: McGra Source: 63% 69% 2011 2011 61%– 61%– 16%– More Than 90% of Projects Gree Less Than 16% of Projects Green Less Than 16% of Projects Green 16%– More Than 90% of Projects Gree www.construction.com 12 31% 37% 16 19 A 9% 6% 90% of Projects Gree 90% of Projects Gree 60% of Projects Gree 60% of Projects Gree lso, the addition of multifamily housing in this w Hill Constr Hill w w Hill Constr Hill w % % % 6% N N ew ew Multifamily Projects) ew Single uction, 20 uction, uction, 20 uction, 38% 46% 2013 2013 14 14 28% 62% 31% 54% 19 15 17 % % % n n n n 6% F amily Homes) n n 23% 21% 2015 2015 30% 23% 24% 77% 46% 24% 79% s s 9% 21% 16 2018 2018 % 22% 24% 38% 84% 37% 24% 79% 18 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market

■ ■ ■ ■ are putting them on 25% or fewer buildings. their projects, but for multifamily projects, the majority single family homes are doing so on more than 25% of photovoltaic panels and groundsource heat exchange on which specific technologies are used. Most of those using of renewables, they are very different in the intensity with are relatively consistent in their overall interest in the use ects, 20% expect to do so by 2016. 2013. While only 8% incorporate them into all their proj ers and developers offer renewables on their projects in Almost two thirds of single family and multifamily build by 2016 Projects Residential in Grow to Expected of Renewable Energy Use average of 3% for new homes and 5% for remodels. 2011, though the percent premium stayed consistent at an customers will pay more for a green home in 2013 than in More single family builders and remodelers find that Value the of Green Recognizes Market are also apparent. availability/affordability. ordinance and regulation changes; and green product to build green in the future: energy cost increases; code, being influenced by three main triggers in their decision multifamily builders, developers and remodelers report Across the residential marketplace, single family and Activity Building for Green Triggers Executive Summary easier to market than traditional ones. multifamily builders and developers find green homes to paying more for green contributes to why 59% of that report increases of over 5%. apartments/condos than traditional ones, including 38% find thatcustomers are willing to pay more for green impacting the growing share of green in the marketplace. the willingness of customers to pay for green is clearly levels of green building by most single family builders, W ■ ■ ■ ■ more in 2013, compared with 61% in 2011. their competitive position and corporate image. government or utility incentives, as well as enhancing cost of building green, such as the availability of important triggers motivating green building activity. Single Family Remodelers: 79% in 2013 vs. 66% in 2011 Single Family Builders: 73% report customers will pay Multifamily: More driven by factors that impact the Single Family: High quality and customer demand are ith customer demand being a critical trigger for higher A high percentage of multifamily builders (68%) also However, differences by sector

c o n t in N

ued W o doubt, this openness Construction Hill McGraw hile the two markets - -

1_8_Renew_GenUse_#01.ep Source: McGra Source: Renewables on Renewables Projects Current Use Future and Use Estimated of Source: McGra Source: ( Triggers for Building Green 3_1_ExecSummary_T Increased Publicity/EnhancedCorporateImage Government orUtilityIncentives Customer Demand Green ProductAvailability/Affordability Code, Ordinance,RegulationChanges Higher Quality Energy CostIncreases A Do Not Offer Renewable Energy Do Not Offer Renewable Energy as an Option Except on Owner OfferRequest Renewable Energy as an Optio Renewable Energy Incorporated Into All Project Builders of New Single Family Homes Builders of New Multifamily Projects www.construction.com ccording to ccording Single and Multifamily Builders) 35% w Hill Constr Hill w w Hill Constr Hill w 23% 2013 8% uction, 20 uction, uction, 20 uction, 34% 14 14 riggers_#02.eps s 54 54

59 % % 60 n 62 % % 19 67 67 % 70 70 70 70 71 % 21% % % 73 73 % % % % % % % s SmartMarket Report SmartMarket 2016 40% 20% Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Recommendations 2011. 61% reporting the same in a notable jump over the reported by 73% in 2013, to pay more for green, that customers are willing leads more builders to find common in the market. green is already becoming shift demonstrates that level of green by 2018. expecting to be at that homes green and 62% than 60% of their new 34% already building more in green building, with increasingly specializing and developers are builders, remodelers that many single family T competitive. green homes to remain firms that are not offering more challenging for will make it increasingly homes in the marketplace the recession. building approach during not have honed their green the marketplace that may those that have reentered especially important for ■ Recommendations Family Single strategies. green specific on place they importance the and request customers in what their differences significant also are there priorities, many green do share two the sectors While hold. takes recovery the as evolving are for green markets multifamily and family single the Both Report SmartMarket ■ he data demonstrate A G expe the to deal with Create a Strategy Greater experience also reen mong Con T I he increase in green n c tation of c H rea ome T his is s s ing s umer T s his of high importance. environmental concerns their twenties consider generation currently in that the younger Many studies indicate their sector. this emerging market in need to accommodate family builders also demographic. Single with a younger buyer firms are already dealing suggests that multifamily environment, which they are better for the green homes because their customers request builders (17%) find that (35%) than single family of multifamily builders fact, twice the percentage increasing rise in green stand to benefitfrom the remodelers particularly units will also be green, that high-end, high-quality an increasing expectation who need to account for I ■ ■ Recommendations Multifamily n addition to the builders, ■ ■ from Buying G M E Competitive a I G P n repare for xperien reener ain arket c Construction Hill McGraw rea M G ore eneration s Ac ed b c e tivity e to Stay c G H ome reen ome s

I n the s

effectively. able to address concerns broad market need to be F family residential sectors. the multifamily and single respectively, across both triggers and obstacles, cost of green are top and concerns about the E coming on line. new, green units that are market with the many in an increasingly tight keep them competitive multifamily projects to of remodeling existing clients the importance demonstrate to their T multifamily building. ■ ■ Recommendations Provider Service and Manufacturer Product Building ■ ■ irms seeking to sell to a nergy performance hey must be able to afforda Se the Single performan of energy G the s and multifamily and H M B Ac e E reen Builder www.construction.com ighly arket to Both c c

ro P tor tor repared to c I nexperien ss omb the s E , empha xperien b ination ility F c s amily ingle e and s in c s c ize ed ed very different markets. effective to address these approach may not be A in housing activity. market with the recovery entered or reentered the experience that have less green residential recession—and firmswith help make it through the building as a strategy to many that relied on green green builders—including both highly experienced products and services to prepared to market their service providers must be manufacturers and Building product into account. the single family market this key difference from and services must take Marketing of products performance factors. impact than specific a broad, sustainable being able to demonstrate more concerned about multifamily sector are T ■ ■ hose working in the s M M b differentiate produ and way E one-size-fits-all u uilder mpha ultifamily arket s taina c s t ize overall s s s in the b your n

c ility an

Data:Data:SectionIntroduction Hed1

he housing market is finally seeing growth after years of declines that have taken their data

Note About the Data toll on the industry. McGraw Hill Construction has conducted three previous studies of green The data in this report are based on an online survey of 116 single family home Tresidential building: in 2006, at the height of the market; in Market builders, developers and remodelers and g 2008, early in the decline; and in 2011, when the ravages 38 multifamily builders, developers and of the extended recession were evident but recovery remodelers. The survey was conducted from appeared imminent. Because activity in new housing December 2013 to March 2014. construction was so low after 2009, the 2011 study ecoverin There are several terms used in analyzing

R expanded to investigate the green building practices by a the data in order to compare with previous firms doing home remodeling work, which this study in studies, including the 2011 study, published h continues, allowing for comparative analysis. in the 2012 New and Remodeled Green One conclusion that emerged from this series of studies Homes SmartMarket Report:

is that, as the recession deepened, green building became ■■

Growt Single family and multifamily firms: Though

: an increasingly important strategy for builders to attract s this is not a term used in the industry, the e buyers in a challenging market and differentiate their m word “firms” is used to reference builders, homes at a time when sales were sluggish. The findings Ho developers and remodelers in the aggregate.

consistently demonstrated that green building is associated When there are different results between ily m with higher-quality homes and that home buyers, even those working in the single family and a

F when the housing surplus gave them an advantage, were multifamily sectors, the analysis reflects le willing to pay a premium for green. As green expertise grew those differences. However, when there are g minimal differences, the data are analyzed among home builders that worked during the downturn Sin together to reflect that correspondence. and as the overall green market grew making green building ■■Builders of single family homes/multifamily and

products more available and affordable, the additional cost projects: Refers only to those building ily of building green also decreased.

m new single family homes or multifamily In 2013, the residential market emerged from its slump. projects. It does not include those doing only Multifamily housing also grew in 2013, making it one of remodeling work. the most robust sectors in the general building market.

Multifa ■ The rigor and vitality of multifamily building has led to its ■Remodelers of single family homes: Refers inclusion in this SmartMarket Report. only to those doing remodeling projects in the sector. It does not include those that Green This report reveals several things about residential green building during the recovery. First, green building continues exclusively work on new projects. to gain in its share of the residential market, creating ■■Multifamily remodelers are referenced, opportunities for builders, building product manufacturers, though only on a trending basis due to the distributors and suppliers. However, while the data small sample size of these respondents. demonstrate that many firms continue to expand their level When mentioned, the term multifamily of green building, the rising demand has encouraged an remodelers includes anyone doing influx of companies into the residential sector that were remodeling work in the sector. driven out when the market bottomed out. These firms Respondents in this report are also analyzed still recognize the value of green building, but they lack based on their level of green work, with the experience and knowledge of the firms that have seen comparisons drawn between those that do the green share of their work steadily increase during the more than 30% of all their projects as green ones, compared with those that do 30% or recession. This impacts the findings throughout this study. less of their overall projects green. The findings also reveal how the multifamily market, while also embracing green building, has different drivers For the definition of a green building or more information on the study participants for green and different benefits compared with the single and approach, see the full methodology on family market. Understanding these differences is critical page 60. for those seeking inroads into this sector.

McGraw Hill Construction 7 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Data Sidebar: has strong implications for the green grow aggressively for several years market to one that is expected to in the shift from a highly depressed single family homes market reflected T Market Homes Family Single Green C A Market Housing Family Single gradually. more increase to expected is market multifamily the hand, other the On that market. in building of green growth the on implications haveto likely strong that is growth dramatic with years, four next the in a peak reach to forecasted are starts housing family Single Single Family Market Boom Green Growth Remains Steady During total of $159 billion. grown 64% in value since 2011, to a Single family housing starts have billion in 2005 to $17 billion by 2011. nearly tripling in total value, from $6 building totaled 18% of that market, building since 2009. However, green a long trough of depressed home to $97 billion and was at the end of 2011, the overall market had dropped small share of that market (2%). By green building accounted for a very Hill conducted at that time by McGraw billion. family housing market totaled $315 construction starts in the single Forecasting Service prolonged recession. reenter the housing market after the construction companies to join or rapid rate creates opportunities for achieved in 2005, growth at this market was still far below the heights double-digit growth through 2016. McGraw Hill activity is expected to continue, with of new single family home building Report SmartMarket he ongoing transformation of the onstruction’s ccording to McGraw Hill By 2013, the picture had shifted. C onstruction demonstrated that T he first study of green homes C onstruction forecasting

Construction Market Green Residential Market Activity , in 2005, W T hile the 2013 he growth Construction Hill McGraw home that also addresses indoor air qualit air indoor addresses also that home (Billions of U.S. Single Family Market Residential* Green Housing homes market. McGra McGra Source: 3_3_MarketSize_#02.eps recogniz a to built either is that one as home green a de nes *MHC 2016. 26%–33% of the market value by with green building expecting to total is expected to continue to grow, in the green sector. providers and product manufacturers opportunities for contractors, service T by 2016 (based on current forecast). billion in 2013 to $80–$101 billion green market, expanding from $37 large increases in the size of the gains in the share of green mean growth in the market, even smaller approaches through the recession. have honed their green building intensive use of green by firms that counterbalancing the increasingly firms with less green experience, level of growth is the influx of be influential in this more temperate 2% ofMarket $6 Billion his dramatic increase in size creates 2005 However, because of the overall Green Market:BaseEstimate Green Market:UpperEstimate w Hill Constr Hill w O ne factor that is expected to w Hill Constr Hill w uction Dodge Constr Dodge uction D ollars) T uction, 20 uction,

he share of green 8% ofMarket $1 8 0 Billion 2008

1 4. 4. uction Mark uction Va y and/or resource ef resource and/or y www.construction.com l ue of residential constr residential of ue et et Fo 18% ofMarket $1 recasting Se recasting

7 Billio

cienc uction st uction 2011 ed green building st building green ed y. rv i ce, as of of as ce, n single family home building. followed a very different pattern than T Market Building Multifamily growth in 2010. after the 2009 downturn, with 23% one of the earliest sectors to recover in 2009 to $48 billion in 2013. market rising steadily from $18 billion has been sustained since, with the reported future green activity. 9) more measured in the pace of their respondents in this survey (see page more reserved in its growth, with years in single family home starts. increases expected in the next four more gradual level than the sharp gains of the last few years and at a growth are lower than the dramatic grow through 2016, the levels of arts from from arts he multifamily building market has W Similarly, green in this market is 23% ofMarket $37 Billion April 20 April hile this sector is expected to andard or an energy an or andard 1 2013 4. 4. A high level of growth - and w and - ate r- ef cient cient 2016 Market 26%– Billion $80 I t was n –$ 33% 101 of Data:Green Residential Building Market Level of New Green Home Building and Multifamily Project Activity

a Single Family Involvement in Green Activity Over Time t a Throughout the recession, new green homes have (Builders of New Single Family Homes) d t accounted for an increasingly larger share of the overall Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 e k new construction market. Now that the recovery has reached the single family home market, the green share Less Than 16% of Projects Green Mar of that market continues to increase and the overall More Than 90% of Projects Green ing size of the market is expanding significantly, leading to 61%–90% of Projects Green 84% substantial opportunities in residential green building. 16%–60% of Projects Green 77% The self-reported activity by survey respondents ecover 63%

R 62% in the single family market demonstrates this trend, 24% 38% a with a clear shift from less involvement in green to 19% greater involvement in green over the next few years. thin This shift is demonstrated in the steady decline in 37% 38% 23% 15% 24% those with low involvement in green (16% or less) and a 12% Grow

23% : dramatic increase in those with medium to large green s 9% 16% e involvement (more than 16%). 28% 30% m 22% In addition, there is a sizable segment of the market 16% Ho

ly dedicated to doing green projects. 2011 2013 2015 2018 mi ■■In 2013, 19% of builders of new single family a

F homes already report doing 90% or more of their le projects green. ing ■■By 2015, nearly one quarter (24%) expect to be at this S Involvement2_1_Market_SFGreenAct_Q6_#02.ep in Green Activitys Over Time d dedicated level. n (Builders of New Multifamily Projects) a ■■ By 2018, that grows to 38%. Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 ly

mi This supports the findings from the 2011 study published Less Than 16% of Projects Green fa in the 2012 New and Remodeled Green Homes ti SmartMarket Report, and the steady growth indicated More Than 90% of Projects Green 61%–90% of Projects Green Mul in both studies is no doubt influenced by the business n advantages of building green for single family firms. 16%–60% of Projects Green 79% 79%

Gree 9% Multifamily 69% 18% Multifamily builders and developers also indicate an ongoing shift to green building, but the pattern of green 54% 24% 6% growth evident in their responses is very different from 46% 24% that of single family firms. Key differences include: 17% 31% ■■A dramatic shift to doing at least a moderate amount 6% of green in the multifamily market: Those with little 21% 46% 21% 6% 37% involvement shrink from 69% in 2011 to 21% by 2015. 31% 19% ■■A more gradual shift by multifamily firms to being dedicated to green: The overall market shifts rapidly to doing more than 16% of their projects green, and those 2011 2013 2015 2018 dedicated to green grows more gradually—from 6% in 2013 to 9% in 2015 to 18% by 2018.

The pattern of green adoption by multifamily builders, is2_2_Market_MFGreenAct_Q6_#03.ep likely that many multifamily builderss work in with strong growth in green engagement but less one or more of those sectors as well, unlike single dedicated commitment, is more typical of companies family firms, who are more likely to specialize in doing work in commercial and institutional sectors, and it residential construction.

McGraw Hill Construction 9 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data This ■ ■ ■ ■ R Family Remodelers Single share of green projects in the future. builders, and they are conservative about the anticipated lower share of green projects currently than multifamily projects is relatively small, it is clear that they are doing a While the number of respondents that do remodeling Remodelers Multifamily Level of Green Remodeling Activity Green Residential MarketBuilding A remodelers in to demands significant reduced 2011 in consumers they increased consider Report SmartMarket such there remodelers homes appeal their older construction increase more new ■ ■ ■ ■ emodelers by 2015 and 25% by 2018. with 16% expecting to be doing that level of work being green. remodelers, with over 90% of their projects that level of green work grows to 79%. committed to green, doing at least 16% green projects. doing remodeling projects are at least moderately T In 2013, 9% report that they are dedicated green By 2018, the percentage that expect to be doing at least Already, in 2013, nearly half of the respondents (49%) s

their the green

he expected growth of that group is steep, Several However, in

shift homes

will

study. work

2011,

homes is standard. future.

adoption and

a energy

in that be comfort.

green

clear is homeowners

than

awareness

remodelers percentage factors their

looking

will very doing are dedicated where

unlike be to corresponds occurring,

trend new

single

remodeling

efficiency, be

be more green. estimates

revealing of

may

more actively

green

in green, home to dditionally,

five for

driven 2011,

family of

reduce

of lag

expecting

firms green

the competitive

years.

green remodelers and

builders.

are but driving with of

because behind

seeking when

projects. benefits

homes

by the

their high

more that renovations

the with was specific

expect

amount

the

consumers

new

difference efficiency monthly

findings

McGraw to Therefore,

understood show nominal,

F of stay in number

believe green the or

home

green

the the hile customer

example,

way a Hill single

may market

majority

commitment green the bills

of their their

Construction

has

builders that

currently, is practices, of

the in a

growth notably

allow

and

family which

become homes

work

with the

R 2_3_Market_SFRemGreenAct_Q7_#02.eps most those ( Involvement in Over Activity Green Time Source: McGra Source: expectations doing single green the in owner from However, multifamily intense that than building 70% 2011 A emodeling

rental 61%– 16%– More Than 90% of Projects Gree Less Than 16% of Projects Green ccording This

www.construction.com multifamily

this

current

green

30% 18

expecting 16% to

family 5% 7% if 90% of Projects Gree 60% of Projects Gree

finding and

that

w Hill Constr Hill w

may % properties, they owners. be

renovations competitive buildings,

cost

growth

green expectations

remodelers. to be 60% for charge

Projects)

suggests uction, 20 uction, 51% F sector, 2013

to 2018, savings irms

stronger of

do becomes

especially,

their 14 tenants 49% 31%

9% 9%

some

market confined which D which

n n benefit may

that oing more

projects suggest—for

area

green

a n also not the could

pressure

28% flat

Single 2015 understood, many

to the for

be need

lag

those rate green, work common

growth

apartment be as 72% 16 14 42%

behind of

to due % % big for

may

both the

amily is that

make even

utilities. steep,

efficiencies

suggesting

grow in

anticipate buyers those

the 21% the 2018

driver building new in buildings

fact their future

of 40% 25% 79% 14

and

in that % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

relatively W Housing Affordable of Green Family Share Single green in 2012. at least some of their affordable housing projects were market, with 86% of the multifamily firms reporting that Green has penetrated the multifamily affordable housing Constructed Housing Affordable of Green Share Multifamily W Green Affordable Housing Green Residential MarketBuilding than the developers more statistically a developers family projects that fewer less affordable in housing projects of with thirds potential are affordable building affordable few green cities multifamily goals, building intensity

much

hile hile projects affordable These A The There

percentage in

factors. green

mong its 30%

across

than

greatest

single of

the nearly features

and builders

their lower

emphasis smaller—but

in compared projects, the single in

findings evenly of number

building 30% multifamily

the housing housing homes. 2012. with these

also

(64%) doing green

create significant

projects. buildings

their It

single

family the

two-thirds adoption housing,

may

The firms

need

family

and

of of strict U a A

distributed urban

affordable

striking

report about

affordable on those affordable their

nited are nother

a levels be family better

with is firms accounting can developers

healthier of that

single

energy still

and

widely than notable more affordable

with

those builders results, of

affordable

areas

save States

doing

one multifamily constructing

construct

of notable—percentage doing

38% green performing firms difference limited

multifamily in

family green it cost

projects

across

quarter and

considered money

savings. housing

projects individual

accounting than

indoor

because

are

green have there

for report (27%) green may work

effective

water homes budgets.

affordable doing

projects builders

single over affordable McGraw

all

explicit

for firms—about be between

specialize is

environment, building equal

among

HVAC do is between

affordable affordable

building categories,

builders a

they

savings,

more homes. 60% households

too

a clear may

viable

the family for

to Hill small

In green. and to

small green

systems demonstrate

incorporate same.

only of

Construction

housing those addition,

likely

those on trend multifamily the

of their any single even A and

builders. amount

and

due

fewer housing,

housing

it, lso, 15% single

with two

green to

green

with of

doing

yield that

the to in

are or

2_5_Market_Af Source: McGra Source: Multifamily Multifamily Firms in 2012 by Projects Housing Affordable Green family 22% of multifamily firms. 60% of their affordable projects green, compared with family firms that are doing any green at all are doing over projects. are segment are homes, has marketing No Green Project 1%–15% Green Projects 16%– 31%– More Than 60% Green Projects This 24%

www.construction.com

incorporating incorporating become

and 30% Green Projects 60% Green Projects 14

finding rather w Hill Constr Hill w

It of % 19

considerations multifamily may

the

their %

fordable_Q9_#01.eps than

may uction, 20 uction,

single 19 demonstrate s

fundamental green green % 24%

suggest

14 being

family

firms.

into into

dictated

their their that other building

Almost half of all the single that,

approach

single

projects affordable

among factors.

market,

cost family

a SmartMarket Report SmartMarket in

significant building restrictions,

housing general

green

firms

that Photo courtesy of Bernstein Associates Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market case study T construction, including a 10,000-square-foot rooftop farm. a including 10,000-square-foot construction, but also abrings new level of attention to in health and its well-being design and a thathousingproject green affordable andincludes energy- water-efficiency, The in 124 eight-story, the building unit South apartment Bronx of New York is homes. “Back in 1998, history of building green and healthy to a healthier life. resource-efficiency, itcan also lead occupants than energy-, water- and homes can bring much more to its done since then has been looked back, and everything we have D partner and co-founder of Blue Sea were great,” says try it?’ and after we did, the results sense and [asked ourselves] ‘ buildings, but we thought it made was still kind of new for homes and Star and and D C partnership between the Standard at a minimum.” Sea Report SmartMarket ity ity Housing evelopment epartment of Housing Preservation Blue Sea Built through a public-private D D evelopment (HP evelopment, the apartments N Y South Bronx of housing project in the he ational Green Building ork, proves that green D Arbor House affordable evelopment has a long A C uthority ( ompany. “ L es Bluestone, Improving Health in an Affordable D E ) and Blue nergy Star NYC N N E W ew ew nergy e never H W Green Multifamily Project A Y hy not ork ), the Construction Hill McGraw T Well-Being and Attention Health to takes into account all these factors disease and asthma, the building income residents with obesity, heart disproportionate number of low- construction decisions. throughout its design and this concept of health to heart a part of families—45% of the total units. and 25 units for formerly homeless aside 31 units for four). Blue Sea also agreed to set (just shy of $50,000 for a family of of the median income of the area households earning less than 60% are designated for low-income the certification at the Gold level under C High- as well as recognition as a “Healthy under the Standard and at the Platinum level he ancer Society. T his award-winning project boasts ICC South Bronx, Bronx, South Arbor House project takes R ise” from the 700 N Arbor House Arbor LEED ew N ational Green Building Y ork

for Homes program, 12 NYC C ity ity that has a A

N H merican ew York ew A L www.construction.com residents ocated in

feature is the 10,000-square-foot Perhaps Community the Feeding different exercise stations. into a landscaped fitness plazawith foot grounds were also transformed make them less appealing. convenient locations and slowed to the elevators were located in less make it more appealing. features artwork and music to include dark steel doors. was widened by 20% and does not at the entryway of the building, and grounds. to the design of the stairwell, elevator just genius,” says Bluestone. while they’re riding a bike, which is like giving a kid a video game to play room or anywhere in the country. with other people on bikes in the setting. “ rider can select his or her terrain and attached to the internet so that the adult sizes, and have video screens the exercise bikes are in both kid and and child residents. that includes features for both adult a free fully equipped fitnesscenter Guidelines. fitness bybeing built to helping residents improve physical air quality. create a space with healthier indoor living green wall all combine to VOC ventilation, use of low- and zero- exhaust systems, continuous free environment, individualized environment, the building’s smoke- help to address these concerns. and includes attention to details that T T T W he project’s 10,000-square- he focus on fitness also extends he building also focuses on materials, and 20-foot-long ith regard to indoor air Arbor House’s most unique Y ou can ride and compete F or example, it contains T he stairwell, located F or example, A I I n contrast, ctive t also D esign continued I t’s Arbor House South Bronx, New York

case studycontinued

greenhouse on its roof that contains a hydroponic farm. The South Bronx is known as a “food desert” without Market g easy access to fresh produce, and Arbor House helps fill that need. “We made a deal with the operator that we charge them no rent for the space, ecoverin R but they had to guarantee that 40% of the produce they grew would stay in in a h the community,” says Bluestone.

Engaging Residents The living green wall in the building lobby helps to remove carbon dioxide and : Growt:

s Bluestone notes that he was provide fresh oxygen to the indoor environment. e

m impressed with the number of residents who had knowledge about “The rooms are all individually saving,” Bluestone reports. With these green and sustainability. “They zoned for heating and cooling, low-income residents paying their ily Hoily m were aware and very excited about and they have NEST thermostats own electric bills, this feature not a F it,” he says, and notes that they that are programmable and allow only provides them with the ability to le

g made efforts to engage residents in residents to connect to them on the control the comfort of their spaces, but maintaining the green building. internet and see how much they’re also to control their energy costs. n

Project Facts and Figures stats ily andily Sin m Developer ■■ Rainwater harvesting system Blue Sea Development Company ■■ Formaldehyde-free insulation Builder Blue Sea Construction Co., LLC ■■ HEPA MERV-8 filtering in corridor and individual AC units Architect/Interior Designer GreenMultifa Danois Architects ■■ NEST programmable thermostats in each room Type of Project ■■ USB charging stations that automatically New Multifamily Project turn off Size/Number of Units ■■ Low- and zero-VOC paints, adhesives, finishes, 8 stories; 120,000 sq. ft.; 124 units: 16 studios, sealants 33 one-bedroom, 75 two-bedroom ■■ 95.7% construction waste diversion Completed through recycling February 2013 ■■ Energy Star LED and fluorescent fixtures, appliances and laundry machines Green Practices and Features ■■ Occupancy & daylight sensors High efficiency 90%–98%AFUE sealed combustion condensing boilers providing hydronic heat ■■ Energy Star fiberglass windows withL ow-E coatings and argon gas ■■ mCHP cogeneration for electric and 100% of hot water supply ■■ Dual-flush toilets

■■ Precast concrete and brick panelized wall system ■■ Integrated pest management program and native plants ■■ Rooftop urban farm to grow fresh hydroponic pesticide-free produce ■■ Advanced stormwater management system Photocourtesy Bernsteinof Associates

McGraw Hill Construction 13 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data W there ■ ■ single doing new multifamily projects (see page 9). trend toward green activity reported by those building housing projects are lagging slightly behind the general Multifamily builders and developers doing senior Sector Multifamily the in Constructed Housing Senior of Green Share W Activity Housing Senior Green Senior Housing Green Residential MarketBuilding so same. than 11), rate multifamily that people Report SmartMarket senior that firms be account potential these ■ ■ projects green: T T • • • • hile hile

hose doing between 16% and 60% of their hose doing less than 16% of their projects green: green However, very

most Senior Senior multifamily: 29% that report 16% to 60% of their General General multifamily: Increased from 19% in 2011 to Senior Senior multifamily: 61% that report less than General General multifamily: from Reduced 69% in 2011 to 46% projects projects were green in 2012. 31% in 2013. in 2013. 16% of their projects were green in 2012.

green green apartments

other

is doing

findings

E at green 67%

family housing.

retiring

still ven important

for least

senior of appeal

is projects multifamily of

a 25% the category. more senior

more most

home

generational multifamily some

may growing

firms F housing

or and of or

than

a to of expensive

housing

less green

can

suggest.

builders over fixed senior

condominiums. this these doing

housing affordable

offer of increasingly

may

three

group, budget. to builders

their

divide housing

firms

projects,

senior

retiring and

may have

quarters

reduced 2012 segments,

suggesting

developers are

on However, housing

and housing be

lower

McGraw

adults

work.

not important the those A

off-putting

2012,

developers lso,

utility weight specializing

market

the Hill

(see is such

the projects

fall

only

the

that

report greater Construction

multifamily

bills perception

into

page

savings it as

20% the demand to

is the

report

market

could the

the given, only

than in U

of .S.,

2_6_Market_Senior_Q10_#01.ep Source: McGra Source: ( Share of Green Senior Projects Housing A No Green Project 1%–15% Green Projects 16%– 31%– More Than 60% Green Projects ccording www.construction.com 28% 30% Green Projects 60% Green Projects 33% w Hill Constr Hill w

to 10 uction, 20 uction,

Multifamily % s 19 10 14 % % F irms) s Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

green projects. less than the 8.0% reported by those doing fewer incorporate green features in new homes—significantly 30% green projects report an average cost of 5.7% to Single family builders and developers with more than Co New Involvement Variation by Level of Green A and Practices in New Homes, Multifamily Buildings and Remodeling Projects Average Cost to Incorporate Green Features Green Residential MarketBuilding report experienced builders’ smaller multifamily findings These 8% on average and by remodelers is 9% on average cost increase reported by builders of new homes is 8.5% reporting Hill 2006, in not all of typically upward explosion after remaining firms 2011 ity and found The new and remodeled projects T the same range, but with a very different distribution. reported for the first time in thisstudy, fall into roughly market if

hey see an average increase of 9% for green in both s costs

the 11%

demonstrate In O O Multifamily builders, developers and remodelers, with they C

align

attract recovery

ne ne

study onstruction a contrast,

left and

residential,

green

averages an prolonged in

with factor factor also

percentage green did

in their

reported

experience

with

2006 response

this n

increased

in cost

found home

stru in

builders

trend

less

multifamily building increase with

new

sector low may is

that that 2011, previous

technologies and there

This still that both

experience

has

the

that

commercial buyers

for

green, period in c downward

projects. may may

now

10%

most

tio

substantially

cost

the is or reinforces

firms

lower and

recovery

such

been represent

to the

many green little

were

be contribute McGraw

2011 n be

8.3%

projects to their

of developers single in incremental

2008.

contributing

that an

bringing

costs tracking

build

difference little a This

can

forced

with

way projects,

study. challenging .

extended

and

costs

and

It of the do

that

family a this

result

will

activity.

lack

Hill to green.

the lower 1% to in

green.

to less firms institutional

McGraw

implement

out

data firms

However, as go recent remain C sector be

this housing doing increase of

onstruction

cost with

in between

a firms green

down.

interesting to

of a period, than

T green L

firm that W

higher on finding

difference he incremental

back

environment. the ack business. Hill

years. of over greener ith

competitive new

the remained Construction

larger becomes

firms

green

slight

market of

McGraw over

the

projects

into

2013

green. sectors;

many

costs.

time.

familiar average is home

market studies

the to

of the

the

firms shift

since . does The

see -

2_7_Market_CostofGreen_NewQ5a_#02.eps_ve Source: McGra Source: New Construction According to Builders of New Multifamily Project New Construction According to Builders of New Single Family Homes Remodeling Projects According to Remodelers of Single Family Homes Features and Features Practices Cost of Green Incorporating Incremental firms green projects, whose average is 9.5%. features is 7.5%, compared with remodelers doing fewer projects green find that the averagecost to add green Single family remodelers that do more than 30% of their R experience into multifamily with by comparable, emodeli 6% 21% Greater Than 10 No Additional Cost

31% 0% those www.construction.com 27%

green

may 7%

increase 41% 38% w Hill Constr Hill w

doing

be to

with 51% buildings 9%

with be 32% entering 30%

g Proje g more uction, 20 uction, %

0% 3%

competitive,

green of

an 4%

9.3%

14 average than

that

Don't Know 1% to 4%

the building.

for c

30% market do ts

those

but more increase

green

that doing 5% to 10

green

not

projects,

are of R

yet

less

7.9%

emodelers %

projects trying SmartMarket Report SmartMarket

have

green

reported r. compared 2

are

leap

work. much

of s Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data S New Buildings percentage that customers will pay more for a green home. 73% of those building new single family homes report Willingness of Customers to Pay for Green Green Residential MarketBuilding single customers just a small percent more. customers are willing to pay 5% to 10% extra, rather than T customers Report SmartMarket down that widely green page to awareness that millennial/generation residential economy green acknowledgement high M apartment than a traditional one. willing to pay more for a new green condominium/ multifamily projects believe that their customers are More than two thirds (68%) of those building new family with condominiums/apartments. not know whether customers will pay more for green a higher percentage of multifamily builders that do and multifamily builder expectations largely lies in have do they green his increase falls largely among those who believe that i

ulti n green

It These a

gle Family gle

there could

is high

may the percentage

some 27)

dramatically,

home. more units. family

also homes, recognized f

fact from may

amily

findings

percentage not may

is have

home were that of a

influence.

is than more

that very

home

green be notably appraisers

the be

builders an

as willing

helping demonstrates

preceding fewer

market

allowing

positive consumer suggest

millennial/generation influence the

of aware builders by

Y of

the T

higher value the more

he gap between single family

multifamily

home to green say

as the and value

general

pay

finding that more

the

generations.

will

(61%) of how than is market

awareness

than This lenders

buyers,

projects more the

green.

the of job widespread

not

the

A green.

that the finding that growing public.

market

market third. McGraw these builders

gain,

pay to for

market

(see

Greater percentage

who the reported shift,

(see

green

Y of more A

This The A this

buyers

Hill

percentage

sidebar s buyers has improves. the

typically nother number

page consistent with market

currently as responds Construction

recovering relatively

suggests

attention in has value more

may

that

2011. This into single

9),

of may

gone on factor

of wider

so value of their

the

to a

New to Pay for Green Are Amount Willing Customers Additional New 2_9_Market_SFNewWillingtoPay_Q5(2)_#02.ep to Pay for Green Are Amount Willing Customers Additional Source: McGra Source: Don't Know W 1% to 4% 5% to 10 Over 10 2_10_Market_MFNewWillingtoPay_Q5c_#02.ep Source: McGra Source: on't Pay More 19 2013 2011 Don't Know W 1% to 4% 5% to 10 Over 10% 4% www.construction.com 5% on't Pay More %

Multifamily Single % 9% % 13 11 w Hill Constr Hill w w Hill Constr Hill w % % % 30% 16 16 F % % amily uction, 20 uction, uction, 20 uction, 25 3% 35%

% Projects) 30 14 14

( ( Homes) % A A ccording ccording 40 44 % %

to to F F irms irms

Building Building s s Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

This customers will pay more for a green remodeling project. 79% of single family remodelers report that their S Projects Remodeling Willingness of Customers to Pay for Green Green Residential MarketBuilding find study Homes SmartMarket Report much family customers are willing to pay for green. increase in those who can estimate what amount their builders. replied to is which difference building advertising developers O savings remodelers factor willing work on that M W remain remodeling multifamily when some multifamily market. be willing to pay more for green than new builders in the i

the hile ulti n just

However, T In The Remodelers are more inclined to expect customers to the

he shift among remodelers is largely due to an

gle Family Family gle that customers factor is

addition,

green,

association

reported trends compared

higher

the

building may 5%

remodelers level

to findings that relatively

significant customers on O

amily amily

pay

number in

green itself

ne supporting

have

may the market. they

of construction.

who projects

compared the

over that percentage

for factor

green depending

performance

part are

from

is current

profit

don’t a with

buildings are projects.

steady emerge the of

one

due

notable of

reported

willing increase

are of green

that

doing remodeling

is respondents

remodelers

2012

the

third

know

to the directly this

relatively

with

willing data.

compared

may increased

responses

from

single

to New and Remodeled Green impact

with is

and

a of that

the this

shrunk

over

high into

the pay,

the

where This contribute multifamily

from

their may

high-end, 2011

level

difference.

increased

family lease small,

activity

the

pay the about

on percentage

in who suggests McGraw

experience with

from

the be only

responses,

the

the study amount

findings than 5%

terms,

those more

there

Those remodelers.

operating the

condominium

other two

over 66% to

16%

luxury

builders Hill single multifamily

number (see this

extra 10% that

Construction

years likely

are doing

they

multifamily of

time). of in hand, who

with

finding

page

especially

their

extra, the 2011 the single family units,

still amount

cost

are

(35%) to ago.

new of

green 2011

17 cont

2_ Source: McGra Source: Single ■ ■ Pay for Green Are Amount Additional Customers Willing to This multifamily remodeling versus more is energy are

i nued ■ ■ 10% range. multifamily builders, more of whom report in the 5% to additional cost range, a marked difference from the remodelers expect that increase to fall in the 1% to 4% won’t pay more compared with 19% of new builders. On the other hand, nearly half (48%) of multifamily 12% of remodelers reporting that their customers

designed 11 Don't Know W 1% to 4% 5% to 10 Over 10%

www.construction.com willing 5% on't Pay More

16 _Market_SFRemWillingtoPay_Q5c_#02.eps difference

limited 34%

the F costs w Hill Constr Hill w amily %

gains to

and markets individual

ability pay may 8%

uction, 20 uction, between

Homes) constructed

possible

for

also ( 37% A

may green 14 ccording

impact units dampen

the

be when

improvements.

within

due new to

key

to the the

and

factors F high

the amount entire irms

building

remodeling

limitations performing.

R like

new SmartMarket Report SmartMarket

emodeling customers

reduced to

building

green

The Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data non-green ones. find marketing green homes easier than marketing 47% of single family builders, developers and remodelers Family Single finding than firms that do fewer green projects (38%). green projects (65%) find green homes easier to market and multifamily firms thatconstruct more than 30% A significantly higherpercentage of bothsingle family Involvement Variation by Level of Green more difficult to market. traditional homes, compared with 17% that find them find that green homes are easier to market than 59% of multifamily builders, developers and remodelers Multifamily Ease in the Marketing of Green Homes Green Residential MarketBuilding high percentage it easier. green is firms greater page have be may compared also between Report SmartMarket one firms the more marketing the 2013 messages respondents building, harder,

continues in

Several O A in

ease greater

component.

contrast

dditionally, ne to

be percentage

(see

smaller part

15). to that

substantial through O

the

corresponds factor with

prevalence more capitalize

ne of

the most

page because do

staff and appeal with

factors

marketing

experience

factor point

to fewer

findings very to

with additional

sensitive, that

demonstrate

a find campaigns

9),

single the to

some

larger of

This

marketing

with

that than better of large green enable

may

likely firms their

multifamily of six that

luxury to

multifamily finding

these

multifamily family

may

the

percentage

percentage in of account

the

not projects, marketing costs experience

2008 contribute

noting homes, on

2008. them a

findings

significant

influence only

units,

their

homes that budgets

homes.

and is associated

firms no consistent for

to than more both

investments. s and

where 2011.

capitalize units

builders

firms is

difference.

point green of of

to the

McGraw

has allows in

either

and

find this

therefore, the green smaller why

the percentage

experience rban way

in stabilized

2011 do shift green

with

2011

issues, finding dedicated marketing 2011 urban

Hill

such

within these

are

easier

in on work populations

Construction

and

reported builders.

which

green study

This larger study, marketing is This

have areas

firms but

is just

green allows in one or

with of

the may

and (see

and

( Level of Ease in Marketing Homes Green ( Level of Ease in Marketing Homes Green 2_13_Market_SFMarketingEase_Q5b_#01.eps Source: McGra Source: also with differentiate 2_14_Market_MFMarketEase_Q5b_#01.eps Source: McGra Source: A A Difcult/More Difcult No Differenc Easier/Much Easie Difcult/More Difcult No Differenc Easier/Much Easie ccording ccording The 24% www.construction.com

suggests 33% non-green

17 greater 20% w Hill Constr Hill w w Hill Constr Hill w %

them e e to to

that

ease uction, 20 uction, uction, 20 uction,

ones Multifamily Single 59% 47% r r

in making

14 14

the by

marketing F

firms market amily

their F

doing irms)

F homes and

green irms)

more attract

green homes

green

buyers.

compared

work

way

to Data:Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects Why Customers Request Green Homes, Condominiums and Apartments

a Lower energy use and saving money are the top reasons Reasons Why Customers Request t a that customers request green homes, condominiums,

d Green Homes, Condominiums/ t apartments and remodeling projects. This finding is Apartments or Remodels consistent with previous studies conducted by McGraw Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 rke a Hill Construction, not only in the residential market, M Builders of New Single Family Homes g but also on green building across the commercial and

n Remodelers of Single Family Homes i institutional sectors.

er Builders of New Multifamily Projects

cov Single Family Lower Energy Use e Similar to the findings of the 2011 study, roughly 73% a R a n equivalent numbers of single family builders and 71% remodelers select the same factors influencing their 78% customers, with a slightly higher percentage of remodelers owthi noting that their customers are influenced by comfort. Save Money Gr

s 72% e Multifamily 65% om Multifamily builders, developers and remodelers find H 84%

ly that their customers are less influenced by issues of health and comfort than single family builders and Better Health ami F remodelers report. In fact, the only influential factor for 32% le g more than 20% of multifamily builders other than energy 36% n i and cost savings is that the buildings are better for the S

16% environment (reported by 35% as seen in chart at right). nd Better Comfort

a One factor that may influence these differences ly between the responses of single family and multifamily 28% firms is that people in multifamily apartments and 36% tifami condominiums may believe they have less control 14% over factors that impact comfort than single family Mul homeowners. For example, it is harder to make changes Better for the Environment to the envelope or to HVAC systems for dwellers in 17%

Green multifamily units than for those in a single family home. 13% Therefore, they may not be as likely to view comfort as an 35% important factor since they cannot do as much to impact it. The only significant difference between multifamily Better Investment Decision builders and remodelers is in regard to the influence of 13% green as an investment decision on their customers. 13% While only 16% of multifamily builders regard this as 16% a reason their customers request green, one third of the multifamily remodelers believe this is an important better comfort (35%) and as a better investment decision factor, also more than the single family builders or (25%). In fact, 47% of single family firms doing more than remodelers. As the housing market accelerates, 2_15_30% ofTr theirig_WhyCustRequestGreen_Q14_#02.ep projects green report better comforts is a multifamily unit owners may need to invest in green to reason customers are seeking green homes. keep their units competitive. While most people associate green with lower energy use and saving money, consumers with more knowledge Variation by Level of Green about green are more likely to consider improved comfort Involvement and return on investment than typical consumers, A higher percentage of firms doing more than 30% of their and they may be more inclined to seek builders and projects green find customers request green homes for remodelers with a broader green portfolio.

McGraw Hill Construction 19 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data ■ ■ ■ Three Similar Family Single Triggers for Green Building Activity Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects respondents—single remodelers different The their between of future triggers, Report SmartMarket 9 triggers influential different for ■ ■ ■

residential availability reported The conscious. many trigger to a (reported residential opportunities family importance emphasizing percentage develop enhance factor relatively that of fourth. remodel costs Green Product Availability/Affordability: Code, Ordinance, Regulation Changes: Energy Cost Increases: different

single

There critical triggering

increase the importance

level

continuing consider

factors green

continue

regions, triggers, to

homes

suggest

for

This

and family triggers ways. are the

and

the trigger of

have

green. green in in

important

consistent as

future

and

builders/remodelers

buildings.

The green

and the the building

two single

the

over

of demonstrates of

findings future rise

important market

their it

for an

and builders

single

those

especially

multifamily

single

an performance to

2011 highly impactful

building. that

importance importance

affordability factors

to that

above

half

impact activity

building other

be building

family increase performance

multifamily increased green

this

family triggers.

activities.

study, green

have

critical with changes family of in

These family

report the by the triggers, in single

Consistent market

and

suggests

building

at the particular

product 73%

activity.

that builders, residential rest the energy builders

2011 from

high remodelers

in of of the

findings

than

demonstrates

requirements

levels The multifamily

2011

family

the green affordability Specifically, projects).

current

builders

concerns in local is

study, and driving are ranks however, level different 2011,

high

the

their McGraw driven decisions

activity.

study,

cost manufacturers

that with of

alike—to still

that single

their

product level, remodelers demonstrate multifamily

of green

products

where third

number study

ability there

there increases

the The of

highly that the

impact are

While

Hill in

about the

markets.

affordability.

important

varies new

has family

over for

that as Construction among market

findings

more building trend

find

are (65%) variety percentage it increase are

build

cost been ranked the

single

energy

drive half

many

still widely

this

report market are

the

is to all

or of

Source: McGra Source: Triggers for Building/Remodeling Green Higher Quality Energy Cost Increases 2_16_ Lenders Recognize Greater V Increased Publicity/Enhanced Corporate Image Competitive Advantage Limit Exposure to Liability Government or Utility Incentive Appraisers Recognize Greater V Customer Demand Green Product A Code, Ordinance, Regulation Changes Builders of New Multifamily Projects Remodelers of Single Family Homes Builders of New Single Family Homes www.construction.com Tr ig_T w Hill Constr Hill w riggers_Q12_#03.ep vailability/Affordability uction, 20 uction, 14 32 alue in Green Homes % s alue in Green Homes 43 % s 49 49 49 51 52 % % % 54 54 55 55 55 % % % % 59 59 59 59% % % % 60 62% 62 % % % % 65 65 % 67 67 67 67 % % 70 70 70 70 71% % % % % 73 73 73 % % % % % % % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

■ ■ ■ ■ T Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects For Variation o Variation the in However, ■ ■ ■ ■ highly higher-quality residential McGraw among for building green. consider competitive advantage an important trigger respectively. family changes the finding trigger for single family remodelers higher quality is also becoming a more important report critical percentage 66%) who and this percentage will who would (reported work marketing of approach improving requirements Single Family Remodelers: Single Family Builders: Fewer firms in thecurrent study Customer Higher Quality: riggers for Green Building Activity

• • • • the

single 2011: 63% selected it. 2013: 55% selected as competitive advantage an the 2011: 69% selected it. 2013: 73% selected higher as quality an important trigger. important important trigger. important green

2011

always

drop competitive

future are understand

and (see

most

impactful builders benefit customer

part is those

there still

study family with

a Hill

among

most a by to page

D trigger

efforts.

their

builders is

drop

be part, of of of

emand:

all expanding

Construction’s 70%

This similar

who higher

other are from

remodeling remodelers critical buildings v for

projects likely and builders

10), The reputations.

er er

from make advantage. by demand the remodelers the

and a is single

consider

who

few

remodelers, emphasizing

in a 2011). triggers

a association

Customer T

importance to quality importance

influenced

significant

consistent its ime

2006. the

their the

their key

than drive

and

are has family first

(already decrease

While

who firms findings

N In

projects

differences. code,

first

in more

such remodelers Builders

been

green rely aligns

ranking

green o

addition

driving demand

builders are doubt,

by of

dedicated customer survey percentage

with of

of this

solely

McGraw

as ordinance,

likely consistent

noted

green

67%

the dedicated

residential the in the among

with

for green. customer

Again,

factor

and for

its the the

this

increased to

triggers association

remodelers, is to

and on of

(reported

Hill position the

to above), remodelers

and

the

2012 remodelers

selected market

take

green

demand

factor to customer Construction pursue

those

this 59%, increasing of

increase since regulation

green,

their

portfolios

report. demand a

single driving

green continued green

is in who and

green as

■ ■ more Future Builders Multifamily than desire green high expect to be by code changes. availability of government or utility incentives as they impacted in their future green building activity by the 70% of multifamily builders expect to be as highly Con multifamily Competiti reduce E The marketing with the further discuss products. affordability and the overall sustainability of these to multifamily builders must emphasize issues of those seeking to market green products and services codes and regulations continue to be important, and than themselves ■ ■ There respondents advantage the single image, the for family important Competitive Advantage: Increased Publicity/Enhanced Corporate Image: nhan Combined, these findings demonstrate that, while

www.construction.com term

services

importance

single single rankings in focusing impact factors c

strongly

building

erns erns

green the

the supported

is family green builders

identified sustainability c enhance

They a

e Corporate Corporate e

technique

single cost family family

market notable trigger,

and

of an for

can building

v A for solely

features

influenced (65%) builders increased

products,

important must of bout Cost/ bout eness this

their

and

help widely family

builders. builders competitiveness green

by green

compared group,

difference

who

32% in

the demonstrate products

strongly

62% these by

for

with

(55%), the specific

market.

available

building.

multifamily significantly this

publicity/enhanced

consider

by of trigger

multifamily

The (see compared multifamily

an their builders

I home

financial

multifamily finding mage and impro and mage

and

influenced

with

A Combined is image in

percentage

page performance ffordability ffordability

in customers, the is

and it

remodelers. competitive

how

the and only notably

ranks

differentiate suggests 30). marketplace, builders

enhancement/

factors higher

with builders affordable

estimation marketplace

corporate their

54%

builders

by with fifth SmartMarket Report SmartMarket

a of

higher

ninth factors

impact products compared

of corporate and

multifamily results. will

that among universally when

single

be as

image

ranking of

rather than the v

that is of the an

they ed ed

all Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data ■ ■ ■ ■ There Involvement Variation by Level of Green T Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects significantly family those doing fewer green projects. firms doing more than 30% of their projects green versus significantly more important trigger forsingle family Lenders recognizing greater value in green homes is a multifamily D green, the information with that is Report SmartMarket multifamily of multifamily for ■ ■ ■ ■ that to because Firms Building Green: market projects buildings, projects recognize compelling. their demonstrate green volume about Availability of a Voluntary Green Building Standard: More Professional Education and Awareness About Customer Higher Quality: riggers for Green Building Activity

ifferen

different these

Financing

greener

value

see knowledge

green

using

are

credentials firms compared

doing homes. green the

likely

four among also it

looking

lenders

from

positive

multifamily that making

firms green

projects builders. green D suggests

on a are c higher

the

emand:

more voluntary, explain building

es for for es

triggers see that

how

with having likely

single purchase

Firms

with doing their Firms

projects homes.)

higher

for and

their

percentage green

green impact

appraisers

consumers. are their

This that more

why

green

firms

customers, approaches

considered

family

S a

therefore, that builders

that more

rented projects third-party

ingle ingle workforce

demand

customers.

building builders investments

trigger this of

they

experienced

doing do expertise

than home

the

is condominium/apartment

versus are more of undertake.

compared

not are F

is able

single

quality

for amily amily fewer suggesting

These

important 30% understand doing McGraw being can

that particularly standard

buying,

green notably

green green

(See green

when owned.

expand of

and family

green

capitalize more educated greener the of

Hill their

well

page and F

with are

work

their residential

and

they irms Construction

different familiar

future by offers

that

Both

likely

informed the green projects. projects the establish

and

notable all

27 a many

also

want single continued

value

the on for about

more to

Doing Doing More Projects Green Triggers on With Influence Greater Firms 2_17_ Source: McGra Source: Green BuildingStandard A A More ProfessionalEducationand Customer Demand Higher Quality vailablity ofaV wareness AboutBuildingGreen Firms DoingMoreThan30%ofTheirProjectsGreen Firms Doing30%orLessofTheirProjectsGreen www.construction.com Tr ig_T w Hill Constr Hill w riggers_Green_#02.eps 24 oluntary uction, 20 uction, % 37 14 % 43 % 51 % 58 59 % % 75 % 83 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Firms Building Variation by Level of Green in this sector that of single family builders, pointing to its importance compared with the other triggers is much wider than builders that consider energy code increases important T Builders Multifamily exception impact on single family builders and remodelers. Overall, the incentives and codes are comparable in Family Differences Single A on Increasing Green Building Activity Impact of Incentives and Regulations Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects credits since it remodelers a significant level, family remodelers than they are for builders, but not at that percentage on from respondents different specific can ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

he gap between the percentage of multifamily incentives. markets, are deemed as more effective than federal driving green throughout the residential market. those that are less green. 62% of the greener single family firms versus35% of green, compared with 22% of those doing fewer. Reported by 38% of all firms doing 30% of their projects firms versus29%. may developers well In general, local incentives, through utilities and local Energy code increases have the greatest impact in T Credits for home power production: 45% for greener T

is majority

ax credits for energy-efficient homes for developers: ax credits to homeowners for energy-efficient homes: Utility rebates are a slightly stronger trigger for single While their

be government

the

remodeling

as doing find

expected

impacted more

future incentives.

more overall players, different

local of

(59%) the more

. The influential producing were single

the robust. green

incentives

energy-efficient responses.

difference.

or one

some

projects

cost and

green incentives which asked

utility family utility

activity

exception

multifamily of

than general energy-efficient

building

about is constructing

incentives

rebates.

are builders easier

notable

those (see clearly

less

the

conclusions is

homes

to projects page

the

builders

likely McGraw doing

importance

(59%), considering take

target

have

federal

20).

tax new

to advantage

homes. fewer:

Hill find single a

and qualify These (70%)

credit, high

can Construction

home credit

federal

impact of

the

be family Builders impact

agree

The

for but

that drawn for of small

this, tax as

Impact on Increasing Green Building Green on Impact Increasing and Incentives That Codes Have a High Source: McGra Source: Energy-Efcient Homes Credit Ta Energy Code Increase 2_18_ Energy Efciency Credit Ta Production Credit Ta State, County or Municipal T Local Utility Rebates x Code 45L Development of x Code Section 25C x Code Section 25D Home Power Builders of New Single Family Homes Builders of New Multifamily Projects Remodelers of Single Family Home www.construction.com Tr ig_Incentives_Q12x_#02.eps w Hill Constr Hill w uction, 20 uction, 25 s 27 % % 14 33 ax Credits 35 35 % 39 % % 41% % 45 s 46 48 49 49 49 % % 51 52 52 % % % % % % % 57% 62 SmartMarket Report SmartMarket % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data ■ For them. builders, with only eight percentage points between activity by roughly the same percentage of single family are considered to have a high impact on green building T B Family Single Obstacles to Increased Green Building Activity Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects Single R that industry recognize and builders first unwillingness to both affordable to less are likely to have an advantage. and services yield green benefits at acompetitive cost residential builders and remodelers that their products (see surprising Report SmartMarket likely Variation Variation housing technologies ■ he remaining five obstacles included in thesurvey single ment compared with the 2011 study. age of single family builders and remodelers currently considered impactful by a much smaller percent this Current e Current uilders emodelers

• • increased the Concerns

Single Family Remodelers: Remodelers: Family Single Single Family Home Builders Who Consider Cur Who Consider Home Builders Family Single single

in 2011 62% 62% in 2013 versus 77% in 2011 to Have a Impact: High Conditions Economic rent

multifamily do concerned costs. pages

the

point. to

strong

This

family

of not

family have

developments. on industry and

the

the family

since

green 20–22). demonstrates interfere

the

green

about

consumer performance economy codes

and remodelers c need,

Ov to home

onomi

impact about

builders home

pay builders,

building

and approaches er er

Companies that can make the case to

building the

be not with

market for

T codes the

c remodeling

of an higher and

ime just education

green c

alike,

green the

consumers. are that

obstacle onditions products single

its activity

for

as has

lack widely largely

cost

than single

positive the

and

an lower approaches.

62% 62% in 2013 versus 76%

led

family

The of

obstacle.

top in

of to projects McGraw perceived

are green

available family

green in

green general trying new costs,

two However,

are an obstacle a

less

impact

agreement

consumer

remodelers trigger

Hill

homes knowledge obstacles

and emphasis

builders

correspond are This but new Construction

improve higher

and on

for

far for

for they

is green

the or

more - green less

with codes not better

are on

- for -

Remodeling Top Building/ to Residential Green Obstacles Source: McGra Source: Lenders Don't Understand Long-T Higher First Costs Consumers Unwilling to Pay Additional Cost Overall Economic Conditions Appraisers Don't Understand Long-T 2_19_ Lack of Consumer Education Code/Ordinance/Regulation Changes Single Family Builders Multifamily Builders Single Family Remodelers www.construction.com Tr ig_Obstacles_Q13_#03.eps w Hill Constr Hill w uction, 20 uction, 14 erm V erm V 45 alue % 51% alue 57 58 60% 60 61 61 % 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 % % 65 % % % % % % % % % 68 68 % 71% % % 73 76 % % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

■ ■ *In 20 *In Top to Over Green Obstacles Time for Home and Builders Remodelers For Obstacles to Increased Green Building Activity Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects 2_20_ McGra Source: a remodelers, more their ■ ■

Code/Ordinance/Regulation Changes Overall Economic Conditions Appraisers Don't Understand Long-T Lenders Don't Understand Long-T Higher First Costs Consumers Unwilling to Pay Additional Cost Lack of Consumer Education green by lenders and appraisers and lenders by green Three that may help drive more green in the marketplace. in 2013 than in 2011. percentage of single family builders and remodelers the reported One SmartMarket Report less builders 62% recovering This conditions owners new improving their enter H re Wider stronger igher first first igher

11 builders,

, the la the ,

units long-term

pressure than Tr

factor change green report home

(or

quarters ig_Obstacles_T w Hill Constr Hill w ck

to of underst of

find

reenter) are market that was

recognize

market

that

are projects,

the economy. is the improved ognition of the long-term long-term the of ognition

bodes competitive

lack

an lenders

on reported uction, 20 uction, value anding anding

improved same of may c

investment for those

osts osts

the of single longer

by is

14 well,

lenders and appraisers w appraisers and lenders

lender

more of be

but , While likely

that

residential able201 for

it and While economic

green,

with is an obstacle noted by a higher in influencing has

for family

lack not

housing improving with

the

premium appraisers

direct concern

knowledge erm V

increased encouraging

homes

in only

12013_#02.eps encourage

2008 erm V

but

is others

its

home appraiser

alue

clear market conditions

drawback,

for McGraw in

long-term ere combined in one question. one in combined ere market alue

Green Residential

its

about 2013,

green

the the

on did

that builders

since sell increase

that

performance builders the funding Hill

is one change existing not

65%

may knowledge. obstacle

to economic this homes.

Construction

may 2011.

the market. 57% 60% 62% 62% 65% 68% 71% value. were make

2013 Single Family Builder understand v

is of in create alue of alue

still

create 2011 of

the

home

not

sure

For and

far

25 75% 75% 63% 55% 77% 66% 80% 2011

Multifamily Builders Multifamily single considered of home builders and 61% of home remodelers. obstacle having a significant impactcompared with 57% green, with only 51% of multifamily builders seeing this the need for consumers who are better educated about T projects s he key difference is that they are less concerned about there growth during important the research higher with residential, demonstrates building associated as to costs * * continued These www.construction.com

gain the

recession.

green family

through will

firms

first the are green

in findings

reduces

in Single Family Remodelers

again

the in

builders, role 61% 45% 62% 58% 61% 62% 68%

recession

triggered 2013

and

with costs. multiple commercial

builders returning

light

experience,

share N

the

that for

thus

drop. ewer it.

are

the

McGraw worst

companies

Further greater

for

the

more sectors particularly on

more concern suggests

companies

to green

the

fact

and 67% 67% of the 66% 70% 64% 54% 76 201

concerns

likely

research frequently the experience

most Hill key %

that residential

over institutional—consistently residential * *

about

that

recession. that

Construction’s obstacles

green interesting part,

the may

worked be

green

about will the

last

concerned by correspond

with multifamily

market

higher reveal building

the

SmartMarket Report SmartMarket

seven less The in played

higher through

green

the when ability

steady familiar green

whether, first continue

market. years—

about an first

with

to costs Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data performance market Only Involvement Variation by Level of Green Obstacles to Increased Green Building Activity Triggers and Obstacles for Green Residential Projects multifamily more having part, of with Generation doing fewer green projects. consider this an obstacle, compared with 77% of firms 53% of firms doing more than 30% of their projects green people do green Report SmartMarket willing family 15–17 as consumer even in

the firms

a This more

bellwether

single to one more

generally

future. for

homeowners

a in their the finding

based

be green

different

more obstacle—higher pay the

market,

important

higher Y family

smaller builders

products

multifamily measures occupants more

is work information.) for interested

consistent

their homeowners. impact percentage

suggesting a

for and

shift consider in tend

in as

level green the

tend (see that

of green

market in on to

future, multifamily first

the

find

with sector

page the green.

to residences.

their

of that green

than note single costs—is

green

the

Since millennial may the

this 21).

green consumers McGraw

This

by additional

that fact involvement.

remain become finding It family

building

many specific units

suggests

may

customers that regarded may (See Hill

generation/

compared Construction home

be competitive firms may

become

pages

single to

cost

building activity the

due,

be that

serve Only

that of

are

with considered doing relatively firms they address to involvement, value unwilling don’t most green

increase continued However, Companies, www.construction.com

face, a

critical understand and

more building. statistically

green the

broad to multifamily it

the

becomes green main pay

factors it

regard light

adoption regardless

correspondence

more,

notable the

obstacles the

significant projects

dampening

industry—from the

the

long-term clear firms

lack of

that previous appraisers

that and green

about highlighted

of their this difference

those full the

value the

between is in

the level finding

recognition industry

the

overall

and consumers

doing

obstacles of

only of

residential

between

green—as lenders

green

that these single

market

fewer. needs obstacle

there

findings

who

family

firms the

green

When sector.

to for the

are Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Sidebar:

I process for it to work well.” E the homeowner and the builder. it’s the real estate agent, the lender, says. “ to unveil the process,” part of the process. “ While steps have been made, more commitment is needed. is commitment more made, have steps been While homes. value of the green capture lenders and help appraisers to needed are industry the across education more data and Better Capturing the Value of Green residential homes, Sandra of increased sustainability efforts in practices has been uneven. C Performance Buildings appraiser to be assigned to the job. be considered in order for a qualified advance that green features should an appraisal would need to know in F valuation of green features in homes. drive or halt efforts to pursue the Green Valuation Tools book on the subject, titled green valuation and has authored a need for appraisers to have skills in Punta Gorda, of knowledgeable appraiser is critical. that illustrates why having a knowledge to fairly assess it. appraised by someone with sufficient but also requires the home be the lender know the home is green on all his homes that not only lets and has added a lender specification C or example, a lender that orders veryone needs to understand the enter at the olumbia and a home builder, agrees, T However, appraisers only represent Matt Belcher, director of the High Belcher provides one example A his interrelationship can help domatis homes, but adoption of these and report green features in have gained tools to identify n recent years, appraisers I t’s not just the appraiser— Appraisers and Lenders A U F ppraisal Service in niversity of Missouri– la., sees increased W A . e really need R domatis esearch Residential A I n light domatis McGraw Buildings Professional through its others in the appraisal community tion to its nearly 22,000 members and A for Education Need have incorrect information. populated and, even then, they could A A can be entered about green features. 185 offer fieldswhere information comps for appraisers, only about (M nearly 850 multiple listing services valuations. “comps”—to help justify their rely on comparable data—or improved market data. O Data for Better Demand home, understood the home’s systems. lender sent another appraiser who systems. area despite its higher-performing comparable level to homes in the He had a home appraised at a A installers and pulling builder permits,” contract value. “ second appraisal came in at 10% over features of the home when it’s built. or designers should list the green agrees and says home builders know how old the system is.” Belcher second owner of the home, they don’t and that’s magic,” says Belcher. had equity in his house automatically, Hill domatis says. “ domatis says the fields are rarely nd even when an M ppraisal ne key concern is the need for “ LS) nationwide that provide Construction W hen I spend a lot of time calling W I I ’m evaluating a green nstitute ( hen notified of this, the V A aluation of Sustainable domatis says that of the

T O 27 his meant the owner ften, if it’s the AI

LS offers it, ) offers instruc D A www.construction.com evelopment ppraisers T hat - the liability,” he reports. because they don’t want to take on aren’t comfortable filling it out either don’t want to learn it or they to Green appraisers don’t want to fill out the everyone out of their comfort zone.” happens with green is that it forces appraisers. “ he sees limited interest among most introduced by A C completed courses in the program. 257 appraisers were listed as having ited. Program, but adoption has been lim E Advantage for Investors courses in the program. By mid- als who have successfully completed it is intended to designate profession cially designated as a “certification,” E investments and sustainability at L interest in green valuation. developments, is taking a significant operates multifamily residential investment trust that owns and in better shape to protect yourself. you have that capability then you’re to speed on,” he says, adding that, “if technologies that you need to be up due diligence because it’s a new set of determine value. “ relies on its own resources to becomes a competitive advantage.” ou Schotsky, vice president of quity quity ity ity Bank in Gainesville, ppraisal F D F or example, he says many annie Mae’s on

A lthough the program isn’t offi E R R D nergy esidential, a real estate esidential, says the company avis, president of R eport, which was T he main thing that E AI fficient U in 2011. “ niform I t raises the bar on SmartMarket Report SmartMarket A F ddendum R la., says A C esidential ppraisers apital A pril, I t n - - - Data:Green Residential Building Practices and Features Most Important Green Practices For New Homes, Multifamily Buildings and Remodeling Projects

More than 90% of new home builders, remodelers and Most Important Green Practices multifamily builders select energy efficiency as one of

data (According to Single Family Home Builders and their choices when asked to identify the three most Remodelers and Multifamily Builders)

important green practices on their projects. This finding Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 is consistent with the findings of previousSmartMarket

Market Builders of New Single Family Homes g Reports on residential building as well as McGraw Hill Remodelers of Single Family Homes Construction’s research on green building across all Builders of New Multifamily Projects building types. While 95% of builders of new single family homes and Energy Efciency ecoverin R 93% of single family home remodelers named energy 95% efficiency as one of their top three practices in 2013, those

in a 93% h numbers declined slightly from 2011, when they stood at 95% 97% and 96%, respectively. Though the decline is minor, it suggests that some builders are prioritizing other green Durable Materials

: Growt: practices for their homes. s 48% e For the rest of the practices, the findings reveal m 57% important differences by sector. In addition, for 24% all practices, there are no statistically significant ily Hoily m differences in responses based on the level of the Water Efciency a F respondent’s green building involvement. 45% le g 48% Single Family 68% Builders Low VOC-Emitting Materials/ Other than energy efficiency, roughly the same percent- Improved Indoor Air Quality ily andily Sin m age of new home builders consider durable materials 44% (48%), water efficiency (45%) and low VOC-emitting 36% materials/improved indoor air quality (44%) impor- 38% tant. These findings are consistent with the 2011 findings though they demonstrate a slight increase in the percent- Construction Waste age that select low VOC-emitting materials/improved Management/Reduction GreenMultifa indoor air quality as one of the top three practices, as only 33% 40% of the respondents selected this feature in 2011. 45% Remodelers 43% As in the 2011 study, remodelers place much greater Site Planning and emphasis on durable materials (57%) compared with Development builders of new homes (48%). However, for several other 15% green practices, the percentage of remodelers that select 8% the option differs notably from the 2011 findings. 27% ■■Water efficiency and construction waste management both rose in importance with remodelers, to 48% in Multifamily Builders 2013 versus 39% in 2011. Multifamily builders place more importance on water ■■ Low VOC-emitting materials/improved indoor air 2_21_Prac_MostImpGreenPrac_Q14_#02.epsefficiency and less importance on durable materials quality declined in importance, to 36% in 2013 versus compared with single family home builders and 40% in 2011. remodelers. One factor that could be influencing this It is noteworthy that new home builders are placing more result is the greater use of LEED-NC by multifamily firms emphasis on indoor air quality, while home remodelers (see page 58), where water conservation can earn many are placing less emphasis on it. more points than durable materials can.

SmartMarket Report McGraw Hill Construction 28 www.construction.com Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

factors may level off. which to make comparisons. have a large portfolio of homes from two years ago on just entering (or re-entering) the housing market may not ■ ■ ■ ■ green building (see page 9). the smaller percentage of multifamily firms dedicated to greening of single family homes, which is supported by of multifamily projects is in an earlier phase than the and recycling (50%) practices (61%) and a focus on material conservation efficiency (84%), use of more waterconserving products/ they were two years ago because of a focus on energy and remodelers note that their projects are greener than A Multifamily findings of the 2011study. their homes greener has slightly declined from the general, the percentage that find green features make today are greener than they were two years ago, in remodelers say that the homes they construct or remodel W Versus Family—2013 2011Single T Features That Make Residential Buildings Greener Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features between 2011 and 2013. the number of specific green features they employed evolution and maturation of their methods may minimize did residential green building during the recession, the greener may be due to two factors. noting fewer specific features making their projects toward single family home builders and remodelers 43% in 2011 to 45% in 2013. practices, which had only a nominal increase, from T ■ ■ ■ ■ he only factor which grew was water conserving with 61% in 2011. 13% in 2011, compared with 19% in 2013 42% in 2013, compared with 49% in 2011. compared with 83% in 2011. respondents find this makes their homes greener, Sited on More Environmentally Sensitive Lots: A Improved Indoor A higher percentage of multifamily builders, developers han hile only 11% of the new single family builders and W Focus on Material Conservation and Recycling: Focus on Energy Efficiency: 75% of 2013’s hile none of the declines are steep, the trend T hey Were A . ir Quality: 58% in 2013, compared T his may suggest that the greening T wo Years O n the other hand, firms that are A s the market matures, these Construction Hill McGraw F A or the firms that go

2_22_Prac_GreenerFeatures_Q Source: McGra Source: Conservation andRecycling A FocusonMaterial R Than Green Two Years Ago Built Projects TodayResidential More That to Contribute Features Making this practice could eventually result. those with some green expertise, and wider adoption of awareness of its importance may be growing among green practice in the survey, this finding suggests that W environmentally sensitive lots (20%, compared with 8%) green building report that their projects are sited on higher percentage of the firms doing a larger share of versus those that build fewer green projects is that a firms that build more than 30% of their projects green T Involvement Variation by Level of Green Products/Practices More W Improved IndoorEnvironmentalQuality A FocusonEnergyEf ciency Sensitive Lots Environmentally Sited onMore he only statistically significant difference between espondents) hile lot design is consistently the lowest performing Single Family Firms Multifamily Firms www.construction.com 8% ater Conserving 13 w Hill Constr Hill w % uction, 20 uction, 14 42 45

% 50 % % 55 58 11 % 61 _#01.ep % % ( A ccording to ccording 2013 75 s % SmartMarket Report SmartMarket 84 % . Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data multifamily customers. resonate differently with single family versus among multifamily customers. wastefulness appears to have great sway, especially notion of reducing environmental impact. of operating efficiently, far more than they value the homes and multifamily units clearly value the notion ■ ■ also very effective. residences, commercial spaces or institutional buildings. powerful arguments for greening buildings, whether customers. they use when discussing green features with their cost savings is the most effective terminology that respondents agree that referencing long-term utility T When Communicating With Customers Most Effective Terminology Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features Report SmartMarket ■ ■ he highest percentage of single family and multifamily environmental impact. use of terms that are more specific, such as reduced sustainable features may resonate more than the marketed to a younger, more urban audience. owners’ lifestyle and values. based on terms that appeal to potential renters’ or Multifamily units and buildings are often marketed multifamily firms, far more than bysingle family ones. that are described as durable. building, and thus, are more likely to be drawn to homes in a home longer than those who live in a multifamily that single family home buyers likely expect to stay regarding durability might be explained by the fact with higher-quality homes. single family home buyers associate green feature is consistent with the 2011 study and suggests that firmscompared with multifamily firms. considered more effective terms by single family T Quality, and to a lesser extent durability, are he term sustainable is considered highly effective by O However, highlighting operating efficiency is ther terminologies for green features

C ost savings continue to be one of the most O wners of both single family T he difference in response T hey are also typically Construction Hill McGraw T

A his finding voiding

hus, A bout Green Features

Source: McGra Source: 2_23_Prac_ With Customers About Features Green With Customers TermsMost Effective When Communicating Recyclable Impact Environmental Reduced Sustainable High Performance Durability/Reduced Maintenance Quality Construction Operating Efciency Long-T Single Family Firms Multifamily Firms 5% 6% www.construction.com erm UtilityCostSavings 12 w Hill Constr Hill w 16 16 % 18 % % Te % rmsforGreenFeat_Q14x_#01.eps 26 uction, 20 uction, % 32 35 37 % 14 % 42 % 44 46 % % % 58 % 72 % 79 % Photo courtesy of Susan Upton of Stages Mississippi Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market

A home features native landscaping home and features native attention to landscaping and indoor comfort air quality by and the resilient of National Association Home energy-efficient this Builders, Waveland Inc. Area, Named the 2014 ofProject the Year, Single Family—Affordable of Exterior Cottageproject ofthe Coastal Affordable Habitat forBay- Humanity Humanity Bay- as quickly as possible, Habitat for mission to build affordable homes 70% of all housing. and had significant damage to over N low-income families,” says Holly green building. also reinforced its commitment to home is one example of the kind of at Bay- “ affordable for the homeowners. to create homes that would be more in this commitment was the desire monthly bills for homeowners.” energy efficiencycan lower the affordability is very important, and W e T uharth, construction assistant e h produce homes for middle- to e A W f fordable a veland Habitat, “so lost 200 historic homes Saint K t the heart of Hurricane Affordable Home After Hurricane Katrina at rina in 2005, Bay W A a L

significant factor C veland o A o uis, Mississippi, astal rmed with a Creating an Energy-Efficient and A C rea, o ttage ttage I n c. c. McGraw Affordable Coastal Cottage Coastal Affordable efficient home possible. were around creating the most the focus of the building decisions and threducing a eye monthlyon improvingbills, muchefficiency of W Comfort Indoor Improved and Energy-Efficiency N quality and comfort. efficiency, and improved indoor air resiliency, water- and resource- efficiency,while also addressing the home focuses on energy change we made to the home,” foam insulation throughout the home. greatly to that was the use of spray the team found that contributed to the by Bay- exemplary green home being built

H ill at i “ Bay Saint Loui Saint Bay

C I ional Green Building Standard, t onstruction was the most expensive E m W erald level of the a veland Habitat.

31 s

, Mi O www.construction.com s n I C s e practice CC e i s rtified rtified

s 700 i ppi because you are researching every [it took to build the green home] a challenge was the amount of time there was a learning velandcurve. “ Habitat has been and in the early days, building green homes since 2009, Bay- Challenges Overcoming fixtures,combine toconserve water. features, such as pervious pavments, and interior rain barrels, native landscaping and I conservation and indoor air comfort. future disasters. make it as resistant as possible to able to withstand high winds to with an eye on the structure being home was also built beyond code quality. Built on the Gulf energy efficiencye andhome indoorfocuses on air more than T Water Conservation and Resiliency Improved says over the use of batt insulation. energy bill reductions of 30%–40% made it a no-brainer.” increase efficiency. practice that was used in the home to ventilation and use of low- to that as does the continuous home. noting how good the air feels in the increased comfort of the home, homeowner) also points to the and a high efficiency H thermostats, appliances, lighting, also extended to programmable water heating system. throughout the home. paints, sealants and adhesives used n h particular, exterior features, like T N T h e

h W e insulation was just one N uharth (who is also the e home also focused on water a e T uharth, “but the h e insulation contributes W at T h erSense N SmartMarket Report SmartMarket N e commitment VAC e e R C uharth says, uharth cites - o V V

ast the and OC a

I lue n study case itially,

continued Affordable Coastal Cottage Bay Saint Louis, Mississippi

case studycontinued

product and having to find materials stats Project Facts that meet the guidelines.” As an and Figures example, she notes the challenge to Market

g find lumber that wasF SC-certified Builder but also locally manufactured. Habitat for Humanity Bay-Waveland Area, Inc. She also points to the initial coverin challenge of finding raters qualified Type of Project/Size e

R 1,212 sq. ft. New Detached Single to do the ICC 700 certification Family Home assessment given their location ina NGBS Green Certified, h in southern Mississippi. However, Emerald Level, ICC 700 she notes that the commitment to National Green Building certification is strong and includes Standard Growt :

s projects certified to theI CC 700 as e

m well as to the LEED for Homes and Green Practices and Features the Enterprise Green Communities ■■ Homeowners manual

ly Ho ly programs. i explaining each green feature m and maintenance procedures a F Educating e ■■ Energy Star appliances and l g Homeowners lighting fixtures; 95%C FLs and the Industry ■■ Spray foam insulation on walls, Habitat for Humanity uses Interior living and dining room floor and attic roof line; sill seal; volunteers to build their homes, caulk bottom plates ly and ly Sin i and all homeowners have to ■■ m Low-E windows: Single-hung contribute toward the building of Bringing Benefits vinyl; dual-glazed insulated their homes. This gives them a to the Region glass unique opportunity to help educate T he commitment to green home ■■ Permanently fixed pine the public—as well as the electrical building by Bay-Waveland Habitat not hurricane shutters subcontractors they use on the only benefits homeowners through ■■ GreenMultifa homes—about green building. lower bills, improved comfort and Low-Voc paints (interior and exterior), sealants and “Green building is a great teaching increased sustainability in their home, adhesives tool,” Neuharth says, not only at the but the organization also believes its public level, but also for their subs, work benefits their entire community ■■ 60-gallon hybrid heat pump where they have helped the trades as they contribute toward the (Energy Star) understand that what might work on revitalization of the region. ■■ Continuous ventilation

a high-end home could also apply to Similarly, the homeowner of ■■ Flooring: OSB (FSC-certified), smaller, affordable houses as well. each of the green homes produced covered with 3/4” solid oak However, Neuharth also by Bay-Waveland Habitat, benefits ■■ Heat pump—17 SEER, 9.1 HSPF emphasizes that “a lot more from knowing they, too, are education is needed.” Like many contributing to improving their ■■ Programmable thermostat green home builders, Bay-Waveland communities. And they still get the ■■ WaterSense faucets and Habitat provides each homeowner benefit of living in a home that is showerheads; dual-flush toilet with a handbook that details the affordable and comfortable. ■■ Pervious concrete driveway green features of the home, why One of those homeowners herself,

tonStagesof Mississippi and walkway p U each feature was chosen and how Neuharth says that it wasn’t just ■■ Landscaping with native plants to maintain them properly. They the big green investments that paid also add information on recycling off, “Little things added up to the and other green tips. greatness of this home.” n Photocourtesy Susanof

SmartMarket Report McGraw Hill Construction 32 www.construction.com Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

statistically viable. division of the importance of these elements is not features are those that report using them, a similar importance of specific green products, practices and differences between multifamily and single family firms. and practice usage, and the analysis focuses on notable of respondents is analyzed for general trends in product multifamily firms is notpossible. the methodology on page 60), a similar breakdown of that responded compared with single family firms (see products, practices and features. builders and home remodelers in their use of green inform the industry of key differences between home solely practicing home remodeling. those solely practicing new home construction and those analyzed by dividing these firms intotwo categories: green products and practices by single family firms is Green Homes SmartMarket Report findings,which are reported in the helping to achieving greener projects. products and practices rate them in importance for on how builders and remodelers using the specific green practices and features currently in use, and information T Green Products and Practices Overview Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features firms regarding the importance of these elements. the differences between single family and multifamily his report includes a review of several green products, Since the only firms included in measuring the However, given the lower number of multifamily firms T o allow for direct comparisons to the 2011 study T hus, the analysis largely focuses on T herefore, this subset Construction Hill McGraw New and Remodeled , the level of use of T his approach helps

current findings. the general usage trends from 2011 are still evident in the reductions are small and not universal, and therefore, study compared with the 2011 study. use of many of the green products and practices in this general trend for all respondents to report slightly less product data section, it is worth noting that there is a W Practices and Products of Green Use Variation in Time Over into this market. and which are being influenced by the influx of builders practices are finding less general interest in the market research is needed to determine which products and products and practices will again increase. experience, it is likely that the use of many of these may be part of that learning curve. the level of use of some green products and practices buildings (see pages 9 and 10), so a slight reduction in to the market are still becoming conversant in green the recession. using green building to improve their businesses during results from 2011, which had respondents who were for green homes, which could be watering down the building experience into the rapidly expanding market findings is the influx of firms with relativelylittle green consideration. hile specific variations over time are reported in every T www.construction.com his pattern, however, is pervasive enough to warrant T O he data suggest that these new entrants ne factor that may be influencing these

A s these firms gain T ypically, these SmartMarket Report SmartMarket F urther Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data of these firms (see pages 8 and 9 for more information). increases in the level of green building activity on the part and remodelers. products and practices by both new single family builders demonstrate a relatively steady use of energy-efficient study and the current one. 5%, and both differences stood at 7% between the 2011 experienced a percentage point difference higher than appliances and properly sized/installed HVAC ■ ■ two exceptions. six percentage points of the findings in 2011,with energy-efficient products/practices remainedwithin remodelers. practices by both new single family builders and the most widely adopted energy-efficient products/ Highly efficient HV Family Single Use of Energy Efficiency Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features two years. consistent than those that build new homes over the last Single family remodelers have remained even more that encourage the installation of more efficient systems. for this rise is the prevalence of tax and utility incentives compared with 78% in 2011. reporting the use of these systems in the current study single family builders who solely build new homes increases in usage since the 2011 study, with 86% of Report SmartMarket ■ ■ single family remodelers. reported by these respondents in line with those of 2011 to 28% in 2013. energy program dropped dramatically, from 48% in current study (73%) versus the 2011 study (65%). respondents say they used efficient lighting in the A Energy Efficient Lighting: D F bove-Code Energy Program: Use of an above-code or single family builders of new homes, the other espite these differences, the findings overall O

nly two categories—use of energy-efficient I n addition, these systems have seen notable T his is consistent with small but steady A C and/or water heater systems are T his drop brings the usage A O greater percentage of ne factor that may account Construction Hill McGraw —

Source: McGra Source: 2_24_Prac_Use_Energy_#03.eps Passive SolarDesign Above-Code EnergyProgram Windows ExceedingCode-MandatedPerformance Efcient Lighting Insulation ExceedingCodeMinimums Energy-Efcient Appliances Properly Sized/InstalledHV Highly EfcientHV ENERGY ENERGY EFFICIENCY Top Used: and Practices Products Single Family Builder (Solely Practicing New Construction) Single Family Remodeler (Solely Practicing Remodeling) www.construction.com w Hill Constr Hill w 16 % 23 23 28 % % AC and/orW uction, 20 uction, % 14 AC ater Heater 64 69 % 72 72 73 73 74 % % % % % % 80 80 82 84 % % 86 % % % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

firms that do fewer green projects. than 30% of their projects green, in contrast to 61% of single and family and multifamily firms that do more lighting. projects. products and practices as firms that did fewer green green reported similar percentages of using green F Involvement Variation by Level of Green throughout this study. features which are prevalent in the multifamily findings performance and higher interest in visible, marketable it does correspond to a lower emphasis on building contribution to performance that insulation offers. But is surprising given the relatively low cost and significant 80% of builders of new single family homes. insulation exceeding code minimums, compared with O parallel those of single family firms,with one exception. about the use of energy-efficient practices largely R Multifamily Use of Energy Efficiency Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features or the most part, firms that do30% of their projects esponses by firms that build new multifamily projects nly a little over half of multifamily firms report using Efficient lightingis used by85% of both the T he only exception to this result was efficient

Construction Hill McGraw continued T his result

report report significantly higher use of the following: Remodelers doing more than 30% of their projects green do a higher versus lower percentage of green work. are more differences apparent between those that ■ ■ ■ necessarily green. ects focused on other types of improvements that aren’t products and practices than those with remodeling proj- ing projects are more likely to be using energy-efficient it makes sense that firms doing more green remodel on specific issues raised by theircustomers. a project or not, remodelers are more likely to be focused whether they are pursuing an overall green approach for ■ ■ ■ versus 54% projects 14% for remodelers doing a lower percentage of green Efficient lighting: 79% versus 50% Windows exceeding code-mandated performance: 72% Insulation that exceeds code mandates: 32%, versus W F www.construction.com or single family and multifamily remodelers, there hile builders may consider energy efficiency

SmartMarket Report SmartMarket T herefore, - Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data ■ ■ HV properly sized/installed HV of homes are insulation exceeding code minimums, believe to have a large impact on the energy demand highly as a way to make homes greener. 80%. single family firms using them the study were selected as important by over 70% of the A Family Single two exceptions: and practices included in the survey important. remodelers that consider the energy efficient products difference between the percentage of builders and F S frequently on their projects. of single family homes appear to be using them more installing this equipment, both builders and remodelers and tax incentives helping to reduce the capital cost of in 2011 to the most frequently used in 2013. and that category shifted from the third highest used heaters were rated as most important in the 2011 study, impact on a home’s energy use. order, demonstrating a consistent recognition of their reported in the 2011 study, although in a slightly different Importance of Energy Efficiency Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features across the single family home market. strategies to improve a home’s energy performance and practices demonstrates the high value placed on A Report SmartMarket ■ ■ or the most part, there is no statistically significant compared with firms that build new homes (76%). by a higher percentage of home remodelers (85%), Performance: Windows are considered important homes (67%) compared to firms that remodelsingle family value passive solar design as an important strategy percentage of firms that build new homes (91%) with superior performance in a new home. impact on a home’s energy use than installing a window during remodeling projects may have a much bigger older homes are often inefficient, so replacingwindows is probably due to the greater likelihood that windows in ingle Family Builder versus versus Builder Family ingle Windows Exceeding Code-Mandated Energy Passive Solar greement on the importance of the rest of the products ll of the energy efficient practices/products included in Respondents report that the top three factors they I A nterestingly, highly efficient HVAC C/water heater. C learly, firmscontinue to value energy efficiency . D esign: Not surprisingly, a higher

T hese were also the top three A C and highly efficient —and six of them by over Construction Hill McGraw and/or water R emodeler W ith utility T

here are T his

E Source: McGra Source: 2_25_Prac_Imp_Energy_#02.eps Efcient Lighting Energy-Efcient Appliances Above-Code EnergyProgram Passive SolarDesign Windows ExceedingCode-MandatedPerformance Highly EfcientHV Properly Sized/InstalledHV Insulation ExceedingCodeMinimums EFFICIENCY in Achieving Homes: ENERGY Greener of and Practices Products Importance fficient Products andPractices) Products fficient Single Family Firms Multifamily Firms www.construction.com w Hill Constr Hill w AC and/orW uction, 20 uction, ( A ccording to ccording 14 AC ater Heater 50 % F irms irms 71 U 76 % 78 sing 80 % 81 82 82 82 82 % % 86 % 87 % % % % 88 89 E 91 % % nergy- % % % 97 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

■ ■ ■ ■ with single family firms. and practices in achieving a greener home compared firms about the importance of energy-efficient products T Multifamily Importance of Energy Efficiency Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features ■ ■ ■ ■ here is less agreement in the responses by multifamily in line with single family firms. remaining products and practices important are largely multifamily building. to asking questions about the level of insulation in a don’t see and haven’t historically been accustomed strategies in the multifamily sector since consumers finding reinforces the importance of highly visible green studies conducted by McGraw Hill energy use by respondents in other green building is widely perceived as a valuable means of lowering finding about insulation is surprising since insulation homes versus multifamily buildings. However, the a greater impact on energy consumption in single family solar design may be easier to accomplish and may have of multifamily firms thansingle family firms. are selected as important by a much lower percentage exceeding code minimums and passive solar design— A by multifamily firms than bysingle family firms. selected by over 90% of the multifamily firms. heaters and energy-efficient appliances—were attract attract customers. important to demonstrate a building’s greenness to systems within the building, so these features are also conscious of appliances and lighting than less visible buyers and renters of multifamily units may be more many units is likely to have a bigger impact. appliances is striking. single family firms as well, the difference in ranking for HVAC multifamily builders and developers. are a highly marketable feature that likely appeals to a single family home. energy usage is magnifiedcompared with the impact in building, the impact of multiple appliances on water and T T Efficient lightingis considered more important T wo additional products/practices—insulation wo products—highly efficient HV he percentage of multifamily firms thatconsider the gain, the impact of lighting compounded across systems are considered very important by A I t is likely that in a multifamily dditionally, efficient appliances Construction Hill McGraw C A onstruction. C and/or water

A continued Passive lso, the W

hile T

his

■ ■ ■ green projects. of their projects green compared to those doing fewer as important by respondents doing more than 30% T Involvement Variation by Level of Green believe that a properly sized and installed H 100% of the companies doing 30% or more green projects A element to improve energy performance. the importance of H of those doing fewer green projects. important to achieve a greener home, compared to 81% ■ ■ ■ hree products and practices are more widely recognized compared to 81% of firms doing fewer green projects. doing more green projects find this important, green projects. strategy, compared with 63% of firms doing fewer of their projects green consider this an important green projects. find this important,compared to 72% doing fewer Insulation Exceeding Code Minimums: 94% of firms Passive Solar A mong single family firms, it is also worth noting that ppliances: 96% of firms doing more green projects www.construction.com D esign: 91% of firms doing 30% or more VAC systems in homes as a critical

T his again reinforces SmartMarket Report SmartMarket VAC system is

Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data and/or engineered wood in their projects. T remodelers, increasing from 55% in 2011 to 69% in 2013. prefabricated components/engineered wood by 2011 study. practices were also the most widely used ones in the components and/or engineered wood. waste, durable materials and use of prefabricated materials and resources are reduction of construction builders and more than 60% of remodelers to conserve three practices/products used by more than half of single family home builders and remodelers, practices/products is slightly different between new conservation are highly associated with being green. projects; for many consumers, recycling and resource products and/or practices for their green remodeling the likelihood that homeowners are requesting these conservation by remodelers compared with builders is be influencing the emphasis on material/resource versus builders of new homes. products and recyclable/rapidly renewable materials remodelers were using more durable materials, recycled consistent going forward. resource conservation among remodelers remains this pattern of higher interest in materials and construction waste reduction. were roughly equivalent with remodelers in their use of prefabricated components and/or engineered wood and build new homes reported significantly higher use of those from the 2011 study, in which builders that only only build new homes. materials and resources more frequently than firms that consistently using practices and products that conserve Firms that solely remodel single family homes are Family Single Use of Materials and Resource Conservation Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features Report SmartMarket his suggests that wider applications for prefabrication Since 2011, there is a notable rise in the use of W More research is necessary to determine whether hile the order that respondents ranked these

T hese findings are different than E ven in the previous study, O ne factor that may Construction Hill McGraw

T hese three the top

Source: McGra Source: Harvested Lumber Certied Sustainably 2_26_Prac_Use_Materials_#02.eps Renewable Materials Recyclable/Rapidly Smaller Houses or EngineeredW Prefabricated Componentsand/ Durable Materials Reduction ofConstructionW MATERIALS MATERIALS AND RESOURCES Top Used: and Practices Products Building Products Reclaimed/Reused NA Single Family Builder (Solely Practicing New Construction) Single Family Remodeler (Solely Practicing Remodeling) www.construction.com 8% w Hill Constr Hill w 22 ood 26 % uction, 20 uction, 31 % % 39 39 14 % % aste 51 % 59 59 63 % % % 69 72 % % 80 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

and resource conservation. recognizing the wider impact of home size on materials again be due to firms that have more green experience than those doing less green work green projects report doing more small homes Single family and multifamily firms doing more than 30% S improve the building’s sustainability across its lifecycle. recognize and effectively promote how these materials F compared with those doing fewer green projects (49%). green are using durable materials more widely (76%) multifamily firms doing more than 30% of their projects For newly constructed buildings, single family and ■ ■ D Involvement Variation by Level of Green from that of single family builders in two areas: and resources by multifamily builders differs significantly T Firms Multifamily Use of Materials and Resource Conservation Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features ■ ■ irms doing more green building may be more likely to he use of products and practices that conserve materials multifamily builders. likely to be building small houses, compared with points for sustainably harvested lumber (see page 58). certification among multifamily firms, which offers be influencing this result is the higher use of 8% of the single family builders. sustainably harvested lumber, compared with just maller Homes maller A One quarter of multifamily builders report using ura s expected, single family builders are much more b le le M aterials . O Construction Hill McGraw A ne factor that may gain, this may LEED

continued R their projects. prefabrication/engineered wood as a means of greening more green work are more aware of the possibilities of fewer green projects. engineered wood compared with 52% of the firms of their projects green report using prefabrication/ green involvement. engineered wood between firmswith more versus less is also a notable difference in the use of prefabrication/ A Pre green projects. reporting their use versus 24% of those doing fewer with 52% of those doing more than 30% green projects in the use of recyclable/rapidly renewable materials between firms with more or less green involvementis For remodeling projects, the only significant difference M mong single family builders of new homes only, there ecycla aterials www.construction.com f a b ricated/ b le/ R a 70% of firms doing more than 30% p E T idly idly ngineered Wood ngineered his may indicate that firms doing

R ene w a b le le SmartMarket Report SmartMarket

, Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data ■ ■ ■ conserve materials and resources. importance on specific practices and products used to of multifamily versus single family firms that place T more conscious of the importance of this factor. contribute to why residential firms doing green work are to building certification systems as well,which may green practice in these sectors, and it is important that construction waste reduction is becoming a common in the commercial and institutional sectors has indicated green projects. reduction important, compared with 61% doing fewer than 30% green projects consider construction waste build fewer. those that build more green projects and those that F Involvement Variation by Level of Green Importance of Materials and Resource Conservation Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features Report SmartMarket ■ ■ ■ or single family firms, one difference is evident between here are no significant differences in thepercentages change from 2011. single family firms rated it as important in 2013, a major 24% of such firms rate it as important, but only49% of from multifamily firms pulled this number down, as only dropped from 66% in 2011 to 41% in 2013. of respondents that consider smaller homes important importance of using smaller houses. homes as it did before the recession. returned to it may still see the market favoring larger that left this market during the recession and have just interested in larger homes again, and many builders by the recovering economy. Homeowners may be more practice. and the percentage of the next highest product or percentage that consider durable materials important product or practice, necessary necessary to see how this trend plays out in the future. considered roughly comparable in the 2011 study.wood and use of prefabricated components and/or engineered importance of durability in this market is not surprising.the largest investment made by most consumers, the the residential sector. Given that homes are typicallydemonstrating the ongoing interest in this factor withinmaterials is consistent with the findings in 2011, T T A he next two factors— he factor with the largest change since 2011 is the McGraw Hill ll consider durable materials to be the most important —are tied in importance, and they were also T he high regard for the importance of durable 81% of the single family firms that do more C onstruction’s research on green building T with an 11-point spread between the his finding maybe partly explained reduction of construction waste Construction Hill McGraw F T urther research is he percentage

R esponses

T ( MATERIALS AND RESOURCES in Achieving Homes/Buildings: Green of and Practices Products Importance Source: McGra Source: 2_27_Prac_Imp_Materials_#01.eps Prefabricated Componentsand/orEngineeredW Reduction ofConstructionWaste Durable Materials Smaller Houses Certied SustainablyHarvestedLumber Reclaimed/Reused BuildingProducts Recyclable/Rapidly RenewableMaterials A hat hat ccording to ccording www.construction.com C onserve Materials and onserve w Hill Constr Hill w uction, 20 uction, F irms irms 14 41 U % sing Products and Practices and sing Practices Products 50 50 % % 61 R % esources) 69 69 % % ood 80 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

marketplace. green experience to enter (or reenter) the residential the housing market may have led more firmswith less projects (59%). appliances (87%) compared with firms doing fewer green more than 30% green projects use water-conserving higher percentage of single family firms that do fixtures versus appliances maybe that a significantly O ■ ■ ■ corresponds to the level of use reported by single family techniques and drought-tolerant landscaping findings of thecurrent study. notable differences between the 2011 findings and the in this category in the 2011 study. However, there are use water-conserving appliances. water-conserving fixtures, but only roughly half of them the gap is even larger. versus water-conserving appliances. But in this case, multifamily firms report using water-conserving fixtures A Builders Multifamily survey. conservation products and practices included in the conserving appliances compared with the other water a higher use of water-conserving fixtures and water- Single family home builders and remodelers report Family Single Use of Water Conservation Practices Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features beginning of a longer-term trend. family firms in water-conserving appliances or is the is just a temporary slackening of interest among single new single family homes since 2011, from 42% to 31%. use of more efficient plumbing techniques by builders of single family firms may alsobe evident in the drop in the ■ ■ ■ compared with a four to five point gap in 2011. appliances, with a 14 to 20 percentage point gap, larger in this study than those using water-conserving the use of water-conserving fixturesis also notably using water-conserving fixtures. a slightly higher percentage of remodelers (82%) report new homes and remodelers. both used by roughly three quarters of both builders of T In 2013, a much higher percentage of builders (86%) and In 2011, water conserving fixtures and appliances were s with single family firms, a higherpercentage of ne reason for the greater use of water-conserving he gap between the percentage of firms reporting T More research is necessary to determine if this finding he percentage of firms usingefficient plumbing

T hese were also the most widely used products A lack of green expertise among some A s previously noted, the recovery of A ll of the multifamily builders use Construction Hill McGraw

Source: McGra Source: 2_28_Prac_Use_W WATER CONSERVATION Top Used: and Practices Products these two sectors are similar. builders, suggesting that water conservation strategies in on energy-conserving appliances (see page 36). when compared to the increased emphasis placed firms (see page 29). emphasis placed on water conservation by multifamily labels like labels like relatively low consumer awareness of water conservation Efcient PlumbingT Drought-T W W fixtures and appliances are rated by E multifamily building would certainly expect it to have C nergy Star appliances, but they may not notice if their onsumers purchasing or leasing a green unit in a ater ater Single Family Builder (Solely Practicing New Construction) Single Family Remodeler (Solely Practicing Remodeling) T www.construction.com hese findings are surprising, given the higher -Conserving Appliances -Conserving Fixtures olerant Landscaping w Hill Constr Hill w E W nergy Star, may contribute to this finding. aterSense, compared to energy-saving 23 % uction, 20 uction, echniques 31 ater_#02.eps % 37 T 14 he results also seem incongruous % 44

% 67 W 69 % aterSense. % SmartMarket Report SmartMarket 82 86 % % T he Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data harming the appeal of their buildings. them to avoid using this method to save water for fear of traditional landscaping more attractive, which could lead possible that they may be concerned that clients will find tolerant landscaping is effective for saving water, it is also be a factor. Here, though, perceived consumer preferences may family home builders reporting use of it (se page 41). of this approach on projects, with only 37% of new single conservation. tolerant landscaping find it tobe important for water family and multifamily firms report that use drought- performance of a home or multifamily building. understanding of how they can contribute to the green familiarity with such products could lead to a better manufacturers of these products. use them consider them important. builders use them on projects, over 90% of those that do multifamily firms. Even though only half of multifamily conserving appliances is even more evident among the of value. firms thatbegin using themconsistently find them to be products reveals that even if the level of use varies, hover around the mid-70s. percentages are separated by less than 5 points and single family firms reporting it as important. Still,both most favored practice, with the highest percentage of have edged out water-conserving appliances as the ranked relatively the same. of importance selected by those using the products is products has changed since the 2011 study, the level While the level of use of the top water-conserving Importance of Water Conservation Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features Report SmartMarket I T T T n addition, a relatively high percentage of single he gap between the importance and use of water- hese gaps represent a good opportunity for the he level of consistency in the importance of these T his is notable given the low level of use W hile builders may believe drought- W ater-conserving fixtures I t suggests that greater Construction Hill McGraw

Products and Practices) Products Source: McGra Source: 2_29_Prac_Imp_ ( CONSERVATION in Achieving Homes: WATERGreener of and Practices Products Importance Efcient PlumbingT Drought-T W W A ater ater Single Family Firms Multifamily Firms ccording to ccording www.construction.com -Conserving Appliances -Conserving Fixtures olerant Landscaping w Hill Constr Hill w uction, 20 uction, F echniques Wa irms irms ter_#01.eps 14 41 U % sing 55 W 60 % ater- % 71 72 C 76 onserving onserving % % % 84 % 91 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

■ ■ among respondents as a whole. being even wider between single family firms than firms doing fewer green projects,with the differences and M F Involvement Variation by Level of Green is 2011. of single family home remodelers, compared with 81% reporting its use, compared with 75% in 2011, and 77% with 82% of single family builders of only new homes control and ventilation is the most widely used strategy single family and multifamily firms. reported in 2011, and it is largely consistent between environmental quality ( T T Use of Practices Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features practices improving gain green experience, wider adoption of products and suggests that as builders entering the residential market increasing interest in healthy homes (see page 46). T ■ ■ irms doing more green projects use low he use of products and practices that improve indoor hese findings are significant, especially given the green work. compared with just over half of firms doing less materials on new homes and remodeling projects, doing more than 30% green projects use low-VOC 10%, respectively, of firms doing less green work. 31% on remodeling projects, compared with 7% and projects use MERV 8+ filtration on new projects and 70% or more of single family and multifamily firms 48% of single family firms doing more than 30% green hat Improve Indoor Environmental Quality ERV 8+ filtration/aircleaning systems more than IE Q is likely. IE Q) largely corresponds to that Construction Hill McGraw Increased moisture VOC materials

I t

, 43

Source: McGra Source: QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL INDOOR Top Used: and Practices Products 2_30_Prac_Use_IEQ_#02.eps or AirCleaningSystems MERV 8+Filtrationand/ Low-VOC Materials Increased MoistureControlandV Single FamilyBuilder(SolelyPracticingNewConstruction) Single FamilyRemodeler(SolelyPracticingRemodeling) www.construction.com 15 w Hill Constr Hill w % 26 uction, 20 uction, % 14

entilation 57 % 64 % 77 SmartMarket Report SmartMarket 82 % % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data and practices will grow. more green work, it is likely that the use of rating systems for their projects (see page 58) and do material conservation. compared with reductions in energy or water use, or since the impacts are harder to measure directly of a more developed green building program, especially findings areconsistent with the 2011study. quality (IEQ) rate them as important products/practices that impact indoor environmental Most of the single family and multifamily firms using Importance of Indoor Environmental Quality Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features compared with 60% of those doing less. low- T consider all IEQ products and practices to be important. more than 30% green work, versus those that do less, whole is still clearly evident. them and their level of adoption across the industry as a importance of these products/practices by firms that use the gap reported in 2011 between the evaluation of the Report SmartMarket he one difference that is statistically significant is for Greater attention to issues of A VOC significantly higherpercentage of firms that do products, with 82% of firms doing more green A s builders continue to use green IE Q is often a hallmark Construction Hill McGraw . T he single family IE T Q products herefore,

T ( QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL in Achieving Homes: INDOOR Greener of and Practices Products Importance Source: McGra Source: 2_31_Prac_Imp_IEQ_#01.eps Low-VOC Materials MERV 8+Filtrationand/orAirCleaningSystems Increased MoistureControlandV A hat hat Single FamilyFirms Multifamily Firms ccording to ccording www.construction.com I mprove w Hill Constr Hill w uction, 20 uction, I F ndoor ndoor irms irms 14 U E sing Products and Practice and sing Practice Products nvironmental nvironmental Quality) entilation 67 69 % 73 % 78 % % 85 88 % % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

issues compared with single family builders. respondents, demonstrating greater sensitivity to these and infill/brownfield sites are used by more than a third of hand, preservation of natural resources/wildlife habitat ■ ■ practices, a few key trends are evident. provide a detailed analysis of the importance of individual design and development practices makes it difficult to W Importance of Lot Design and Development adopt green practices and methods. that interest in this practice may grow as more builders those doing fewer green projects (21%), which suggests firms doing more than30% green projects (36%), versus of smaller lots is also more widely used by single family use of smaller lots and infill/brownfield sites. with 26% using it, only four percentage points above the However, in 2013, interest in this practice is less evident, percentage points above the next most popular practice. family builders solely building new homes and was ten wildlife habitat was a practice used by 37% of single buildings are more likely to trigger code requirements. of multifamily firms, an expected finding as their large R in many areas may help drive wider use of this practice. T more likely to use this practice than any of the others. 2011 study, in which single family builders were also far of the other practices. mitigation compared with the percentage that use any that only build new homes use storm water runoff Nearly twice the percentage of single family builders Use of Lot Design and Development Green Residential PracticesBuilding and Features ■ ■ he presence of building codes about stormwater runoff unoff mitigation is also used by over three quarters importance is needed. multifamily builders, greater industry awareness of its used by approximately one quarter of single family and creating greener projects. Since this practice is only using this practice consider smaller lots critical to open space. most important is the use of smaller lots to preserve Preservation o Preservation S U hile the small number of respondents using green lot torm F I se o se n 2011, the preservation of natural resources/ or multifamily builders and developers, on the other f

w S maller maller ater ater W ell over three-quarters of respondents R uno f L ots:

N T ff atural atural his finding isconsistent with the

By far, the practice considered M itigation and and itigation R esources/Wildli Construction Hill McGraw T he use f e:

Source: McGra Source: 2_32_Prac_Use_LotDesign_#02.ep ■ Open Spaces Smaller LotstoPreserve Resources/Wildlife Habitat Preservation ofNatural Storm W Public T Proximity to Grayeld Site Inll orBrowneld/ AND AND DEVELOPMENT New Homes: LOT PREPARATIONDESIGN, Single Family That Builders Only Build Top Used and By Practices Products ■ of this practice in the industry. Mandates about stormwater help raise the importance consider them important to achieve greener homes. A firms’core green practices. and thus may be harder to incorporate as part of these are entirely dependent on the availability of these sites are considered less important than other factors, as they to achieve greener homes. public transit believe that these practices are important brownfieldsites or place their projects in proximity to Pu I n bout two thirds of firms that use these practices www.construction.com f b ill/Bro lic lic ransit ater RunoffMitigation w Hill Constr Hill w 14 T ransit: ransit: % w 22 22 uction, 20 uction, n 26 % % f ield ield % A 14 bout half of the firms that use infill/

S ites and Proximity to to Proximity and ites I t is not surprising that these 49 s % SmartMarket Report SmartMarket

Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Sidebar: celebrity, but not so. custom made for a health-nut hours alone. measured in gallons and kilowatt- environmental healthiness is not long recognized that a building’s T Mandates Health development company built on spec by the five-year-old actually comprises five residences given. the kitchen; low- high-tech surfaces kill bacteria in skeletal impact; ultraviolet light and floating-floor system minimizes cortisol production; a special lighting boosts occupants’ morning heights. indoor environmental quality to new completed residential building takes I of healthy homes. production industry for wider potential the creating are tools, industry and research growing as well as health, on of buildings impact of the awareness public Greater Increase the Potential for MoreGrowing Healthy Public Homes Awareness and Industry Resources More recent federal regulations, paint took place shortly thereafter. human life, phasing out lead-based negative impact on animal and was aimed directly at pesticides’ famous 1962 book only-in- condominium gives off an air of successor movement to organic food. environmental quality is arguably the toxins from building materials. inside a residence and of exposure to increasingly aware of air pollution homeowners are becoming A and occupant health more generally. sustainable design and construction, is banking on the convergence of Report SmartMarket n downtown Manhattan, a recently he sustainability movement has cross the economic spectrum, T his new Greenwich T N hese features would seem I Healthy Green Homes ew- ntegrated blue-spectrum Y W ork luxury. hile VOC Silent Spring R achel T paints are a he townhouse V D illage Y elos. et C D arson’s elos I ndoor Construction Hill McGraw using flame retardants in foam. frees furniture manufacturers from journal I occupant health. materials’ chemical content and the connection between building composite-wood products, validate year-old formaldehyde standards for Architectural C C like the increase, thanks in part to actions based contaminants is poised to indoor air pollutant.” most common and the best-known scientists called formaldehyde “the 35,000-member group’s “ & health organizations are leading of building-based contaminants, T Healthy Buildings for Resources Industry publication of “ possible carcinogen. years after it was identified as a wood products until almost 20 formaldehyde in composite- Guide” newsletter did not investigate N speeding up. building impact on health is also T Awareness Public Growing 1998 such as the 1989 ban on asbestos, ndoor o cultivate further awareness he consumers’ learning curve about alifornia’s ompound ew O A wareness of indoor building- thers for a Y N ork–based nonprofit Mothers ational E D Chemical Reviews nvironment” in the scientific ecember 2013 revision of T E B-117 standard, which missions Standard for C C V L onsider the case of the oatings and the four-

F olatile ivable Planet: ormaldehyde in the 46

Y O et by the 2010 rganic www.construction.com T , a group of he Green T he A progressive investors like aligning with homeowners or market on the whole is more slowly are still solidifying, the residential between building toxins and health for their products. sources and manufacturing locations to voluntarily publish ingredients, D in late 2012, the online database professionals. Since its launch their information precisely for knowledge gathering, tailoring industry are participating in the VOC only two have standardized low- publicly traded most recent study of the 10 largest D marketplace in its report “ asthmagens in the products Healthy Building last further discussion about asthma, building materials. respiratory health and exposure to to researchers a link between program, which strongly suggested implementation of a green cleaning Bronx went down even prior to the certified green homes in the South residents’ asthma rates in Sinai School of Medicine found that the charge. homes. sources and prevention methods for consumers about indoor pollution Healthy the ccording to isclosure eclare has allowed manufacturers Perhaps because correspondences A A dvocates within the building D paint. merican ecember the nonprofit A A nd a team from the Mount ir campaign educates R n A equired.” significant part of C L alvert ung U N .S. home builders, A etwork identified A nd, sparking I ssociation’s nvestments’ F D LEED ull elos. - Data:Use of Renewable Energy

Use of Renewable Energy in Residential Projects

Use of Renewable Energy on Current Use and Estimated Future Use of

data All Projects Renewables on Projects t Many firms doing residential projects, whether single Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 family or multifamily, expect to see an increase in their use of renewables in the next three years. The Renewable Energy Incorporated Into All Projects Marke g percentage of firms that expect to use it on all projects Offer Renewable Energy as an Option more than doubles from 8% to 20%, while those who Do Not Offer Renewable Energy as an Option do not expect to use renewables at all is also reduced Except on Request From Owner sharply, from 35% to 21%. This finding demonstrates Do Not Offer Renewable Energy ecoverin

R that builders, remodelers and developers still expect to a see the industry shift toward greater use of renewables, 2013 2016 in and it suggests that renewables are still considered an th important part of a builder’s strategy for achieving high- 8% performing homes. 21% 20% Grow

: The only notable difference in the overall use of s 35% e renewables between single family and multifamily firms m 34% is between those that use renewables on all projects and Ho 19%

those that offer them as an option. 40% ily 23% m ■■10% of single family firms currently offer a

F renewables on all their projects, compared with 3% le

g of multifamily firms. ■■On the other hand, 42% of multifamily firms offer Sin renewables as an option, compared with 31% of single and family firms. 1_8_Renew_GenUse_#01.eps ily

m However, the level of awareness and interest in using renewables remains the same across both groups. ifa t The higher percentage of single family firms using

Mul renewables on all projects corresponds to the higher

percentage of those firms that are dedicated to green (doing 90% or more of their projects green), compared Green with multifamily firms (see page 9).

McGraw Hill Construction 47 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data These toward ■ ■ of intensive users of some of these technologies, builders, remodelers and developers are the more technologies in some of their projects, single family are more widely employing specific renewableenergy While multifamily builders, remodelers and developers Technologies Renewable of Specific Use Use of Renewable Energy in Residential Projects Use of Renewable Energy F technologies firms, to by-project of projects. heat solar service different of when Report SmartMarket The Intens renewables renewable are photovoltaic ■ ■ or Multifamily Firms: Less Intensive Use Single Family Firms: More Intensive Use

• • • • the be all awareness A

striking. single Nearly all Nearly using groundsource heat exchange do so on Over Over three using quarters photovoltaic panels do so on Over three using quarters groundsource heat exchange Over half using photovoltaic panels do so on

25% 25% or projects. fewer 25% 25% or fewer do so on 25% of their projects. differences

exchange higher

renewable photovoltaic part

seeking

overall decisions findings

higher providers

technologies. This i

of family

ty of Use of ty

basis, technologies.

percentage

among an

more than 25% more than of their projects.

panels

percentage are

consistency

to renewables

and suggest overall

in the are

technologies

engage firms, but incorporated.

should

projects. the panels,

even

multifamily benefits more and

they

intensity

green U

use that of

groundsource wind—on

these

tilities consider

have

likely

solar multifamily

suggests use,

their the

and approach.

included renewables

firms

but of and to thermal, firms. markets

wider projects challenges

use be

these

at McGraw in

renewable

made

least

very

relatively of firms

the familiarity in heat F

solar differences are groundsource

the in

Hill

is different use one

multifamily

which report exchange both more of

Construction survey—

of using energy of more than more than

high project-

moving their

with terms

likely

these use

ways.

level

Specific Renewable Specific Technologies Current Use Future and Use Estimated of 1_9_Renew_T Source: McGraw-Hill Construction, 2014 Construction, McGraw-Hill Source: 2013 2016 51% 12 Panels Photovoltaic Solar Panels Photovoltaic Solar

Single FamilyFirms % www.construction.com c on 45% 66% ti n ued echnUse_#01.ep 46% 12 Solar Thermal Solar Thermal % 45% 26% Multifamily Firms s 52% 26% Heat Exchange Groundsource Heat Exchange Groundsource 63% 42% 15 Wind Wind 1% % 24% 13 % Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

■ ■ slight renewable that all these messages are at least somewhat effective. A Multifamily message that clearly influences the market, In the single family home market, there is not a single Family Single The When Marketing Residential Renewable Energy Features Most Effective Messages Use of Renewable Energy independence depends These compared about environment least family projects. respondents A they to highly frequently it (see is to attuned invest ■ ■

be enthusiastic making finding of N Energy independence and resilience much higher percentage of multifamily firms report lso,

still include their W early

not utilities savings

effectiveness

a pages

use hen

somewhat

the

difference

very struggling

the in findings effective home

audiences. surprising

all

the

them),

it on percentage Single it the

approach

renewables

with very and make

effective energy comes 47–48 (90%)

whether renewable

or case as has

support,

and need

are

unit utility effective. while

is energy family

effective,

in the to

roughly of

for

under for

of to that

features

clearly

the resilience make

in the

way

case specific

messages those more

that the

renewables, multifamily

savings.

adding generally

least percentage multifamily home

with

independence

energy multifamily multifamily

20%, residential to

the finds on

the correlated the

information).

who

market of

somewhat 29%

messages

case builders a

same

suggesting residential positive renewables project-by-project

highly

any technologies.

considered find

on finding

firms

with

that

McGraw firms renewables.

percentage

their

firms

project building.

the

the with

these effective

are

impact and

has

consider nearly effective

appear that

message

home Therefore, that are

projects

find more that Hill

the

utility

the

for

is messages

will more

Construction with their message

findings

a discussion on one

this

most marketing

buyer

message

to single of

likely

appeal

energy in

the savings. basis

(when more at only

sector quarter

to a

1_10_Renew_Message_#01.eps Source: McGra Source: Residential Projects Residential in for Features Energy Renewable of Marketing Messages Effectiveness Considered anEliteService Utility SavingsDuetoSellingBackEnergytheGrid Concern fortheEnvironment Energy IndependenceandResilience 55 42 40 31 66 43 61 50 Multifamily—Somewhat Effective Single Family—SomewhatEffective % % % % % % % % www.construction.com w Hill Constr Hill w uction, 20 uction, 7% 38 14 5% 18 16 % % % 45 10 % % 29 59 60 % 60 16 % % % % 24 Multifamily—V Single Family—V % 77 SmartMarket Report SmartMarket % 84 % 90 ery Effective

% ery Effective Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Sidebar: I efficiency. extending that effort into water that standard. eleventh property to achieve on landscaping. T machines to near-potable quality. showers, tubs, sinks and washing treats greywater from bathroom in 2010. offering net-zero energy in homes other efficiencies. high-performance systems and through a combination of solar, achieve net zero energy consumption L we build in,” he says. and the people in the communities for our trade partners, our suppliers years, but it is also transformational product line over the next several broad impact. builder, nationwide. that it can offer to home buyers for consistent proven technologies Homes, says that president of sustainability at at its water efficiency. A Jacob Industry the Transforming scale. a large on homes residential out high-performance roll to home builders by national years recent in efforts to thanks offering, a mainstream to concept a custom evolving from are homes Net-zero Net-Zero Homes Report SmartMarket ancaster, he greywater can be reused talla says the company is in a W I “ n aiming for net-zero energy, T ith the ZeroHouse, emphasis on energy and ZeroHouse” with a dual unveiled its first “ n his is about transforming our D A F awn ebruary 2014, T K talla, corporate vice Net-Zero Homes he B recognizes it has a I C ts water recycling system C alif., is designed to D A reek community in ouble ZeroHouse is its s a large home T K he house, built K B Homes looks B Homes began K D B Homes K ouble B is now K

B Construction Hill McGraw years. performance offerings in recent been expanding its high- builders, Meritage Homes, has A Concerns Cost-Benefit practices and comes with a warranty. that required consistent installation efficiency after finding a system aim for high-performance water prove themselves.” adding new technologies “as they continuous process of improvement, E company has built more than 82,000 efficiency homes. Since 2000, the company’s evolution toward higher- says these are the next steps in the zero energy home and uses have been limited to date, home builder to offer homes. minimum standard in all of its Star’s performance criteria as the $300,000 $300,000 home,” he says. “ say you have [an energy-efficient] level of energy performance. “ cost gap when trying to achieve that However, he still sees a significant offer net-zero homes nationwide. the company ultimately plans to certified homes for system, and that provides a more economical partnered with a new solar provider high-efficiency systems. sees prices continuing to drop on Meritage Homes, says the company I ndoor airP nergy Star–certified homes. s with other national home A Brent lthough its net-zero concepts I t was the first to build a net- I A t was also the first national nderson, spokesperson for LU A S and nderson reports that

50 E W K nergy Star,

B decided to E aterSense. P A www.construction.com I triple- t recently A I talla f it costs E

nergy L

et’s in their homes.” that’s what customers want to have available. the various credits and incentives doing in terms of regulations; and municipalities and governments are what the competition is doing; what customers and the marketplace; says. “ available for a limited time,” she the product. builder, it is still evaluating homes than any other national home produced more net-zero energy that although the company has A marketing and sales at Shea Homes in 2014. its 2,000th net-zero energy home T 2012 under the brand SheaXero. some of its net-zero energy as a standard in homes could change. the cost-benefit analysis of net-zero nationwide. offered by government entities coincided with a range of incentives among major home builders interest in high-efficiency systems home builders. viability of net zero among major incentives also play into the future “ more than just economics,” he says. month, the buyer’s motivation is and that saves you $50 to $100 per an extra $20,000 to get to net zero T he company expects to complete ctive “ Shauna Shea Homes began offering R hey are doing it for other reasons.” A ebates, tax credits and other t this point, we say it’s L W ifestyle e closely monitor our W F T armer, vice president of e want to make sure A rilogy communities in s incentives expire, T C n he recent rise in ommunities, says

Data:Green Building Products

Trusted Sources of Information on Green Building Practices and Products

a Trade shows and trade organizations are highly trusted Most Trusted Sources of Information About t sources of information on green building practices and Green Building Practices and Products da t products for both single family firms and multifamily Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 firms. In addition, there is no significant difference in rke

a Single Family Firms the percentage of single family builders and remodelers M Multifamily Firms g in the trust level for these sources of information. n i This demonstrates that a presence in trade shows Trade Shows, Conferences, Workshops ver and relationships with trade organizations should be 65% co a high priority for any firm’s marketing division seeking e 63% to cut across the single family and multifamily markets— a R a Colleagues/Other Builders n and to reach builders and remodelers alike. 65% thi w Single Family 53% o Colleagues and other builders is the other top-trusted Gr

Trade Associations : source of information for single family firms, reported s e by 65%, significantly higher than that reported by 56% om multifamily firms. Combined with their affinity for print 58% H

ly literature, single family firms are relatively traditional in Home Building Websites terms of how they gather green building information. ami 50% F To reach this audience, product manufacturers and

le 66%

g service providers may benefit from finding inventive n i ways to use builders’ and developers’ peers and other Product Manufacturers S

colleagues to create interest, including social media. 44% nd

a 58% ly Multifamily Home building websites and product manufacturers General Websites 38% tifami are the other top-trusted sources for a significant number of multifamily firms, reported by 66% and 32% Mul 58%, respectively. On the other hand, general websites Print Literature are trusted much lower as is print literature. These 35% Green findings suggests that manufacturers already have a direct conduit to this sector and should capitalize on that 16% through continued direct activities and by focusing on Retailers specialized digital communication methods. 34% Variation by Level of Green 24% Involvement Government Resources A higher percentage of single family and multifamily 15% firms with more than 30% of their projects green report 26% that they trust the following sources for information on green products and practices more than do those with and to know about government resources. Further, the fewer green projects: greater trust of print literature suggests manufacturers ■■Trade Shows: 75%, compared with 59% 1_1_Prod_TrustedInfoSources_#01.eps and others should have detailed materials in print form. ■■Print Literature: 42%, compared with 24% For greener single family firms, home building ■■Government Resources: 24%, compared with 12% websites are highly trusted, reported by 67% of those Firms doing more green work are more likely to go to doing more than 30% of their projects green, compared trade shows featuring information about green building with 40% of those doing fewer green projects.

McGraw Hill Construction 51 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data ■ ■ ■ ■ green where from 2011. product categories, comparable with the findings manufacturer for building products in seven different Over 70% of respondents can name a green brand or than 30% green projects. their projects green compared with those doing more familiarity between respondents doing 30% or less of There is also little variation with overall green brand Involvement Variation by Level of Green brands or manufacturers they can name. builders and single family remodelers in terms of the There is limited variation between single family Versus Remodelers Variation Family Builders by Single Green Product Manufacturer or Brand Ability to Name a Top-of-Mind Green ProductsBuilding likely Flooring following working builders other, sustainability with with the their Report SmartMarket ■ ■ ■ ■ Since family builders compared with 70% of remodelers. with 63% of remodelers the chart at right. single family firms. This averages to the 56% shown on flooring brand/manufacturer,compared with 51% of the chart at right. single family firms. This averages to the 78% shown on appliance brand/manufacturer, compared with 74% of in household prioritize emphasis remodeling Water conservation/plumbing fixture:85% ofsingle A Flooring: 76% of multifamily firmscan name a green A ppliances: 83% of single family builders compared ppliances: 89% of multifamily firmscan name a green

greater drought-prone

a brands green

more brand

couple there

water

in are and

categories:

water The

both used

residences ease

technical

more that was payments,

for appliances

projects. bills of than

including findings

firms

the notable

found

consumers conservation, significantly

familiar are

marketing insulation, areas,

single

building with a

(see by

relatively unless are

exceptions. have water

they There

multifamily

with family higher

page also

relate

materials brands more

exterior

U products. would

conservation green which

were consistent

.S.

18). and

small green

to McGraw

consumers familiarity

likely may that multifamily

brands two may

firms framing,

portion to

involvement.

The

Single

would demonstrate Hill categories help

lead not across

Construction familiarity in

marketing with

their

explain

of are HV the to

family be

sectors,

less firms AC

a more

1_2_Prod_AbilitytoNameBrand_#01.ep Source: McGra Source: ■ ■ (According by TypeCompany/Brand Product to Ability Name a Green Top-of-Mind than The Flooring Electrical/Lighting Exterior Framing Siding Insulation Paint/W W Appliances HV Doors andWindows green known specialize demonstrates ■ ■ with 73% of those doing fewer. doing a higher percentage of green projects, compared of those doing fewer green projects. projects can name a green brand, compared with 69% Water Conservation/Plumbing Fixtures: 83% of those Insulation: 82% of the firms doing more than 30% green ater Conservation/PlumbingFixtures AC www.construction.com

similarity

30%

projects all Finishes

in w Hill Constr Hill w

the

of in

their green

to industry,

that across uction, 20 uction,

All the

projects

work. green R

responses 14 espondents)

the

not

brands

rest green

solely 56 56 56

% % % and

the are confined

those

product becoming those s 74 74 75

doing 77 78 % % 79

to doing

82 % % %

categories those %

widely

fewer

that Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

1_3_Prod_ McGra Source: by Reported Brands Geen More Top-of-Mind Product Than 5% of Respondents another. that have much wider recognition in one sector than single family and multifamily sectors, there are several While many green brands are recognized across the Top-of-Mind Green Brands Green ProductsBuilding are number outnumbers lighting insulation, *R Product Category Doors & Windows Electrical/Lighting Flooring Ext. Framing Appliances Paint/ W HV Insulation Plumbing W Siding e spondents in 20 in spondents ater Conservation/ The AC

number

all Finishes

category w Hill Constr Hill w of

Though

brands

brands HV 06 and 20 and 06

pofMindBrand_#02.ep those AC

uction, 20 uction, of

08 include builders and de and builders include 08

that

and there by

brands recognized

• Pella (11% • Andersen (15% • N/A • N/A • N/A (21%) • Sherwin-Williams • Lennox (10%) • Carrier (12%) • T (29% • Owens Corning (11%) • James Hardie • T • Kohler (22%) recognized

multifamily 14 rane (17%) rex (31%)

were exterior

is )

consistency

2006* recognized

cited )

framing in

by ve

) as 2011 builders lopers only lopers

single s

McGraw green • Marvin (8%) • Pella (12% • Andersen (17% • N/A • N/A • Owens Corning (26% • James Hardie (19% • T • Whirlpool (13%) • GE (34%) • Benjamin Moore (8%) • Sherwin-Williams (32% • Lennox (13%) • Carrier (14%) • T • Delta (14%) • Kohler (21%)

in and between

rex (27%) rane (17%) in . .

the family

2013.

also in ponses in 20 in ponses Hill 2013,

electrical/ the Construction 2008* )

builders

the areas there 11 and 20 and )

) of 14 ) include builders, remodelers an remodelers builders, include )

• CertainT • Icynene (9%) • Owens Corning (25%) • Therma-T • Marvin (12% • Pella (14% • Andersen (18% • Lennox (8%) • Carrier (12%) • • KitchenAid (6%) • Bosch (7%) • Whirlpool (15% • GE (26%) • N/A • Benjamin Moore (12%) • Sherwin-Williams (39%) • CertainT • James Hardie (38% • T • Moen (14%) • Delta (16%) • Kohler (32%) • • Bamboo (6%) • Armstrong (7%) • Shaw (9%) 53 Tr Tr oto (6%) ane (20%) ex (24%)

this in marketing may The that information manufacturers a account

specific

the eed (11%) eed (6%) 201 www.construction.com

ru (6%)

year, current single

) be

1 study. )

) better

) for

the sector

strategies ) family de

those

study’s

from

This ve first

lopers suited

• Johns Manville (5%) • Dow (5%) • Certain T • Icynene (7%) • Owens Corning (22%) • Pella (12% • Jeld W • Marvin (14% • Andersen (16% • Lennox (9%) • • Carrier (20%) • Kenmore (6%) • Bosch (7%) • Whirlpool (11% • GE (33%) • Benjamin Moore (10%) • Sherwin-Williams (37%) • CertainT • James Hardie (42% • American Standard (3%) • Moen (17% • Delta (18% • Kohler (29%) • Azek (7%) • • Bamboo (5%) • Shaw (6%) • Armstrong (10% • GE (6%) • LED (8%) • Progress (9%) that

Tr Tr 2014 Single Family may

difference

year . and ane (16%) ex (18%) disparate differences.

want findings

for for need

multifamily en (13% that eed (12%) eed (6%)

one green

) ) to )

)

category to

sources increase )

suggests

) ) clearly ) sector

adjust

products )

firms

than

demonstrate

(see their has

their

• T • Duron (5%) • Benjamin Moore (5%) • Sherwin-Williams (53%) • American Standard (10% • Johns Manville (5%) • Icynene (5%) • Dow (11% • Certain • Owens Corning (24% • Marvin (8%) • Jeld W • Andersen (13% • Pella (26% • Mitsubishi (5%) • Goodman (5%) • • Carrier (32%) • Frigidaire (8%) • Whirlpool (18% • GE (45%) • CertainT • James Hardie (55% • Moen (13% • Kohler (37%) • LP (5%) • • Armstrong (11% • Bamboo (13% • Shaw (24%) • Sylvania (5%) • Square D (5%) • Lutron (5%) • Lithonia (8%) • GE (8%) that Tr Tr 2014 Multifamily

oto (8%) seek ane (16%) ex (18%)

been in another. page

strategies

profile

some SmartMarket Report SmartMarket these en (11%

eed (8%) product Te

included 51), ) ed (13% ) )

lines with )

) and ) ) )

to ) ) ) ) Photographs Courtesy of Bob Fortner Photography Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market case study F remodeling project. for the Heritage Hills whole-house in a row, including most recently project of the year for two years Builders ( N T the quality of life of the occupants.” affordable, we’re really adding to are we making these homes more are very, very important. has led sustainable remodeling projects e Heritage Hills project clients were Certification Role of Green savings. “ than cost reductions and energy of existing homes are about more remodeling work, green retrofits multiple listing service (M ongoing national effort to green the purchasing a car. He mentions an gallon ratings consumers use when r litzhouser compares getting a H and verify what was done.” certification was a way to document he convinced them that “green want it green certified.’” However, but they didn’t come in saying, ‘ efficiency, energy, water, etc. ... value of indoor air quality, resource his clients were “oriented toward the greener. were also very interested in making it comfortable in many ways, but they seeking to make their home more tant to obtain is a H he considers particularly impor- N SmartMarket Report SmartMarket T ating for a home to the miles per h h G at I is overarching approach to doing n BS rating, one certification that ional addition to the value of the W W blitzhouser specializes in residential C at Paradise or Jeff A NA i C o blitzhouser to win the i s blitzhouser explains that o nstruction, a firm that sociation of Home mfort and healthiness H B) green remodeling

W Improving Homeowner Quality of Life i E F R o S und rating. Heritage Hills Whole-House Remodeling Project Remodeling Whole-House Hills Heritage N L o S) by Through Green Remodeling t only W I

E i R b- S M cGraw Hill Construction Hill cGraw litzhouser notes that the clients were to indoor air quality concerns. e projectfactor wasthat its distinguishedaggressive thisapproach O Quality Air Indoor on Emphasis more daylight into the spaces living in the home. addition of above, which space represented also helped a bring new three-season more Adding light natural was a high priority to the and clients, it included the to operate that home.” real value and what it is going to cost other has a H lar, and one has a H looking at two homes that are simi- are contemplating buying. the performance of the homes they is available to consumers to gauge to the M those performance data fields added o acteristics of a home being listed. “ adding the H tive data points gained from green certification for their home. persuaded them to agree to pursue and H ur area, we have been able to have Chapel Chapel n His explanation of what the objec- E R L S S, so now that information would mean to his clients H i E ll, North Caroli North ll, E

R R

S S rating to the char- 54 of 70, they can see E R

S of 98 and the www.construction.com I f they are N G W BS i n b- a I n crawl space, and you are pulling air H gas-fired fireplace, and replacing all the fireplace and inserting a vented, including replacing windows, sealing to improve energy performance, important to getting the improved indoor air quality was that the interest that they had in states, “ saving energy. controlling its quality, as well as coming into the home is critical to that controlling the sources of air the indoor air quality. He clarifies as critical strategies for improving were also cited by sealed ducts, returns, and plenums, over 30 years. band has worked for the mold remediation needed—the hus- issue, and not just because of the particularly concerned about this ronmental Protection VAC Many of the choices they made

duct work with insulated and I f you’ve got duct work in a W A i s blitzhouser finds an example, he W i blitzhouser A g N U ency for G . S. BS rating. E n vi- continued Heritage Hills Whole-House Remodeling Project Chapel Hill, North Carolina

case studycontinued

into the home from the crawl space, they made to improve durability. the things that help folks control there are opportunities to bring in The roof needed replacing, so they their cost of living.” He finds that mold and other contaminants.” Thus, opted for lifetime, architectural many people, like the clients on Market

g he was able to achieve the goals of asphalt shingles. They also replaced this project, want to make aesthetic improving the energy performance vinyl flooring with solid oak flooring. improvements to bring them up to and the indoor air quality with many Wiblitzhouser reports that replacing current trends, and that this creates coverin of the same measures. the deteriorated wood windows with the opportunity to also “drastically e R PVC/vinyl and composite double reduce the cost of homeownership hung, very low-E windows not only and energy usage.” ina Importance of

h Durability helps with energy performance but A nother critical element for Wiblit- with the goal to improve durability, Improving Quality zhouser for a successful green retro- given that these new windows do of Life Growt :

s fit is making the home more durable not require painting or repairs as W iblitzhouser’s renovation efforts e

m and decreasing the cost of main- frequently as the original windows. are driven by the recognition that tenance. In fact, he is particularly the improvements associated with a

ly Ho ly enthusiastic about making green Saving Homes in Older green retrofit help improve the quality i m investments in homes like this one, Neighborhoods of life for the homeowners. In partic- a F which was built in 1979, because the F or this project, a significant ular, the time and money savings are e l

g homes themselves typically are built motivation for the clients’ investment crucial. Wiblitzhouser points out that with more durable structural materi- in renovation was their desire to stay reduced costs for maintenance and als. “This home was built from yellow in their neighborhood. Wiblitzhouser energy translate into more money that pine, which is structurally stronger finds that these older neighborhoods doesn’t have to be spent on the home. ly and ly Sin i than the type of lumber that is being offer a great opportunity for updating This recognition pushes the green m used in today’s home building, which because they are highly desirable, projects beyond just water, energy is spruce or white pine.” being “close to urban areas and and resource conservation to address There were several changes that mass transportation. They have all issues of comfort and durability. n

stats

GreenMultifa Project Facts and Figures Home Remodeling Company and seal HVAC ductwork; Remove whole-house fan; Paradise Found Construction Air sealing around windows, doors, floors and ceil- Type of Project ings; Seal wood burning fireplace with direct-vent Retrofit of existing home originally constructed in 1979 natural gas fireplace insert. Increased Water Efficiency: ■■ Over 40% Water Use Reduction Green Practices and Features Increased Energy Efficiency: ■■ Features: Replace existing toilets with 1.0 gpf dual- flushW aterSense-rated toilets; Replace existing ■■ Reduced HERS Rating from 98 to 59 faucets and showerheads with WaterSense fixtures; ■■ 40% Energy Use Reduction Replace aging clothes washer with more efficient unit. ■■ Features: New PVC/Vinyl double-pane windows; Healthier Indoor Air Quality: Replace electric water heater with tankless natural ■■ Features: Install HVAC supply and pressure balanced gas water heater; Add dual zone controller on existing exhaust into crawl space; Remove mold; Replace HVAC and replace oversized AC compressor and coil; kitchen cabinets with KCMA Certified formaldehyde- Replace lighting with LED can lights and CFLs; Install free cabinetry; Use no VOC paints and finishes;E nergy insulation in attic to R-38+, and seal and insulate pull- efficiency features with air quality benefits, such as down stairs; Insulate and seal crawl space; Replace HVAC duct sealing.

McGraw Hill Construction 55 www.construction.com SmartMarket Report Data:Green Ratings

Awareness and Use of Green Building Product Ratings

T here are many green building product labels and ratings W hile the current findings include both single family ata systems, and the respondents awareness and use of and multifamily firms and all of the 84% may not be at the d them is widely disparate. high level reported in 2011, it is nonetheless clear that this ■■Energy Star is at one end of the spectrum, recognized system has become one of the most well established in by virtually all of the industry and used by three quarters the industry. Market

g of the respondents to make their product decisions. ■■A t the other end are systems such as Cradle to Cradle, Multifamily Compared With GreenSpec, EPDs/HPDs and Green Seal, that are still Single Family coverin unfamiliar to about two thirds of single family and T wo product rating systems are used by a significantly e

R multifamily firms.I f they can increase awareness higher percentage of multifamily firms than single overall, the potential for growth in their use is strong. family firms. ina

h However, a few of these product and rating systems ■■Forest Stewardship Council (FSC): More than twice have been in place for over a decade. Findings on how as many multifamily firms (40%) use this for product companies learn about green building products and decisions than single family firms (18%). Growt : practices (see page 51) may offer insights into how to ■■GreenSpec: More than three times as many multifamily s e better reach the larger industry. firms (18%) use this for product decisions than single m family firms (5%).

ly Ho ly Variation Over Time i One factor that may influence wider use of product rating m One system that has seen strong growth in recognition a systems by multifamily firms is that they are more likely F since the 2011 study is UL Environment. Currently, 84% e

l than single family firms to work in other building sectors,

g of respondents report being at least aware of this system, like commercial or institutional construction. This may with 38% reporting that they use it to make decisions give them wider knowledge of some systems more on building products. In comparison, only 46% in 2011 popular in those sectors areas. reported having a high level of awareness/knowledge of ly and ly Sin i this system. m

Awareness and Use of Green Product Certification and Rating Programs GreenMultifa Source: McGraw-Hill Construction, 2014

Use to Make Product Decisions Know About But Do Not Use Not Aware

7% 8% 9% 10% 14% 16% 20% 23% 38% 25% 25% 20% 30% 41% 33% 36% 38% 74% 46% 68% 67% 71% 60% 45% 51% 44% 39% 24% 16% 1% Cradle to GreenSpec* Environmental Green Seal SFI GreenGuard WaterSense FSC* Underwriters Energy Cradle Product (Sustainble (Forest Laboratory (UL) Star Declarations Forestry Stewardship Environment (EPDs)/Healthy Initiative) Council) Product Declarations (HPDs)

* Reported at signicantly higher rates by those working in the multifamily sector versus single family.

SmartMarket1_4_Rat_AwareUseProdRatings_#01.eps Report McGraw Hill Construction 56 www.construction.com Green Ratings

A wareness and Use of Green Building Product Ratings continued

Awareness and Use of Green Building Product Ratings

Single Family Remodelers Compared Use of Green Product Certification and ata

d With Single Family Builders Rating Programs T he only significant difference between single family (By Level of Green Involvement of All remodelers and builders is that twice as many firms Respondents) that do only remodeling work use Sustainable Forestry Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 Market

g Initiative (SFI) (16%) as those that do only new home More Than 30% Green Projects building (8%). 30% or Less Green Projects

coverin Variation by Level of Green Energy Star e R Involvement 88% A higher percentage of firms doing more than 30% ina 67%

h of their projects green use each of the green product rating systems included in the survey more often and Underwriters Laboratory (UL) Environment more intensely than do firms performing less green 48% Growt : work. While the difference is notable on rating systems 35% s e like Energy Star and UL Environment with a high level m FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) of recognition across the residential housing sector, it is 43%

ly Ho ly particularly striking in the lesser-known systems, where i 10% m use can be at three, four or five times the level of those a F doing less green work, or even higher. WaterSense e l

g While wider use of green product rating systems 40% by firms that do more green projects is not surprising, 8% the degree of difference is nonetheless notable, and it suggests that the continued growth of green will help GreenGuard ly and ly Sin

i increase the use of many of these systems. 33% m However, even among the firms doing more green 6% work, less than one quarter are using several of these SFI (Sustainble labels and rating systems. These findings demonstrate Forestry Initiative) that, even among greener firms, work still needs to be 23% done to increase awareness and use of some product 7%

GreenMultifa labels/rating systems, and that as long as such a wide range of labels and systems exists and no widely Green Seal acknowledged industry product standard exists, 20% adoption levels of many may remain relatively low. 4%

Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)/Healthy Product Declarations (HPDs) 18% 3%

GreenSpec 18% 2%

Cradle to Cradle 13% 3%

McGraw Hill Construction 57 1_5_Rat_ProdRatingsGreenLevel_#01.epswww.construction.com SmartMarket Report Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data may not apply directly to them. utility bills, especially since factors like water savings but they may be less sensitive to the specific impact on renters or buyers, may be seeking to be generally green, popularity of this standard among single family firms. and owner education. system includes a section on operations, maintenance systems perform. units since they have direct influence as to how those to building performance than occupants of multifamily Single family homeowners may need to be more attuned ■ ■ types. types. by the different needs of occupants in the two building certification systems. different levels e of single awarenessfamily and and use multifamilyof marketsgreen building have very T Awareness and Use of Green Building Certification Green Ratings provides attractive content for marketing materials. widely recognized outside the residential space and thus SmartMarket Report SmartMarket ■ ■ h aware of LEE compared with multifamily firms. use of the ICC 700 National Green Building Standard, compared with single family firms. much higher share of multifamily firms that are A Single family firms report much wider awareness and • • More than 50% of the single family firmsthat are • • Multifamily firmsare also muchmore aware of L O

T T Homes SmartMarket Report SmartMarket Homes study in reported the family firmsare consistent with the findings inthe 2011 two two residential L (55%) of single family firms. awareness of this system, compared with about half familiar with it are also using it. N 2011 to 30% in 2013. standard has grown over the last two years from 21% in ccupants of multifamily units, whether they are h h e e findingson the level of awarenessand use of the e percentage of single family firmsusing the w C o nstruction, with nstruction, nearly all (97%) having some D

standards also report using them, R e E cognizing this, the ED T T h h certification systems by certification single New and Remodeled Green New and Remodeled ese factors may contribute to the ese differences are likely driven LE . ED M cGraw Hill Construction Hill cGraw

certification is I CC

700 rating E ED

for

1_6_Rat_BuildingCert_#01.eps Source: McGraw Hill Construction, 2014 Construction, Hill McGraw Source: aware of LEE respondents doing over 30% green projects report being aware of of the standard, and over three quarters of those that are those doing 30% or more green work report being aware it is particularly true of single family firms,where 62% of fewer green projects. National Green Building Standard than those doing projects are both aware of higherand numberusing ofthe firmsICC 700 with more than 30% green A Involvement Variation by Level of Green Standards and Certifications Standards and Awareness Use of Building Green ICC 700NationalGreenBuildingStandard LEED forNeighborhoodDevelopment LEED forHomes less than 30% green projects reports using (25%). 13% 23% 26% 24% 32% 62%

Multifamily—Aware ofButNotUsing Single Family—Aware ofButNotUsing A www.construction.com

significantly higherpercentage (40%) of all the A m 13% I CC ong single family home builders, no firm doing

700 are also using it. D

N 30% D 2% 16% 26%

than those doing less green work 32%

26% W h ile this is true across the board, 42% 53% Multifamily—Using Single Family—Using 13% 64% LE ED

N 75% D . Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market data

Green CGP credentials, multifamily respondents, with only 3% having earned Green (Master ong single family respondents,a 39%CGP have(Certified Greenearned Professional)credential. A Green Professional Credentials Held Green Ratings family respondents. is by far the most popular credential among the single m LEE ■ ■ ■ ■ builders must address: builders that has six categories main the 2012 ICC 700 Institute, NGBS Standards National American by the Approved in issued 2008. was first the standard since ICC 700 NGBS is the update first an upgrade. undergone each has recently and requirements, distinct for LEED Each has Homes. NGBS) and (ICC-700 Standard Building Green National ICC-700 sector: in use in the residential widely systems rating building green national comprehensive are there two in some markets, that have sway systems rating are there a While few regional National Green Home Building Rating Systems ■ ■ ■ ■ D Water Efficiency Energy Efficiency sign/Preparation and Resource Efficiency Lot The The new 2012 of version the e A A D velopment C s s

D accreditation is more popular than CGP among sociates, 3% that are sociate accreditation. e e rtified Green Professional), compared with 16% that are I n contrast, less than 5% have M LE ED M

A cGraw Hill Construction Hill cGraw P LE s for Homes and ED ■ ■ its green efforts. It also has efforts. its green of that and market importance the rising reflecting projects, for renovation/remodeling the scoring NGBS has improved certification. achieving homes in the performance the energy to increase is expected standard more This rigorous version. 2006 the than rather performance as (IECC) a for basis measuring Code Conservation Energy use of International the 2009 the include version the 2008 to sustainability. approaches the for need regional address to are the intended system in points of discretionary and the range to emerald, range from bronze Rankings ■ ■ Building Owner Education Operation, Maintenance and Indoor Environmental Quality

In addition, the 2012 ICC In 700 addition, from to system this Changes A P LE or ED T h LE is

ED C G

single family houses. many ways more similar to nonresidential projects than T 13% that are percentage of builders dedicated to green in this sector. part of building projects, a finding supported by the small in the early stages of considering green an important multifamily respondents suggests that this sector is still percentage reporting any green accreditation among build commercial projects. However, the relatively low h is is no doubt due to the fact that these projects are in www.construction.com LE ED building. building. of green the definition expand to health and human change like climate factors important for and categories new impact a outcomes on focus building tools, submission easier include V4 all across the LEED platforms issues. priority regional and for innovation possible points additional with along air quality, environmental indoor and resources, materials and atmosphere, energy water efficiency, sites, sustainable transportation, and location can earn points: in which buildings categories six main It includes still V4. version with systems, the rest of the rating LEED in 2013, with along updated communities. green for lots points in using added

A General improvement with with improvement General for LEED Homes was also P s in categories other than Homes. A d

ditionally, many of these firms SmartMarket Report SmartMarket Green Multifamily and Single Family Homes: Growth in a Recovering Market Methodology: ■ ■ ■ ■ Single and GreenMultifamily Homes Research and multifamily firms. in the analysis as single family firms broad divisions, they are referred to categories. building construction in the same and those engaged in multifamily remodeler or land developer— home construction—as a builder, operation as engaged in single family of firms that listed their principal this report looks at the responses T of Firms Type C McGraw Hill T enough to allow for trending. However, the groups are rigorous listed below may exceed 10%; of error for some of the sub-groups the smaller sample size, the margin margin of error of 7.7%. Because of at a 95% confidence interval,with a size used in this survey benchmarks in the final analysis. with a total of 154 responses included D T ( A represented by the and remodeler community as survey of the report are based on an online Report SmartMarket NA ■ ■ ■ ■ he majority of the analysis in he research findings in this he survey was conducted from 38 respondents 116 respondents multifamily builder responses. MHC Contractor Panel to obtain NAHB to their members. to the online survey was sent by ontractor Panel. Multifamily firms: Single family firms: 227 invitations were sent to the An e-mail invitation with a link ecember 16, 2013 to March 3, 2014, ssociation of Home Builders HB) membership database and W C U hen rolled up into these onstruction (MH .S. home builder N

T ational he total sample

C ) Construction Hill McGraw other credible rating systems. N would comply with the owner education or projects that environment quality; and home efficiency; improved indoor efficiency, energy and water sensitive site planning, resource that incorporate environmentally renovating and land development home building, home remodeling/ defined as referring specifically to I Building Green of Definition sample size. a trending basis due to the small remodelers are referenced only on do remodeling work. Multifamily do new projects and those that family and multifamily firms that a further breakdown of single occasionally, the analysis includes (see below for more details), comparisons with previous studies I solely practice remodeling. new construction and those that terms of those that solely practice family firms were also analyzed in of products and services, the single remodeling. all that engage in building or n the survey, green building was n order to conduct meaningful ational Green Building Standard or • • • T he list of firms above include Single Single Family Firms Practicing Single Single Family Firms Solely Single Single Family Firms Solely Remodeling: Remodeling: 21 Both New and Construction Practicing Remodeling: 39 Practicing respondents New Practicing 51Construction: I n the analysis of the use

ICC www.construction.com 700 the firms were engaged in. level of green building activity that involvement, which is based on the in the report is the level of green A Involvement Level of Green the C were conducted by McGraw Hill builders referenced in this report T Studies Previous to Comparisons are available on pages 9 and 10. multifamily builders and remodelers builders and remodelers and of green activity for single family hree previous studies of home onstruction and also drawn from n analytic variable widely used • • • A NA In In 2011/2012, 416 builders In 2008, 400 builders completed 400 In 2008, In 2006, 353 builders completed 353 In 2006, full representation of the level January 2012.January between November 2011 and completed a survey conducted February and March 2008. and March February 2008. a survey between conducted March 2006. March 2006. and 2005 between December a survey and conducted analyzed HB membership. n SmartMarket Report Resources Organizations and websites that can help you get smarter about green homes.

Acknowledgements:

The authors wish to thank our premier partner, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), and contributing partners, Menck Windows and Waste Management, for supporting this research and helping us bring this informa- McGraw Hill Construction tion to the market. Specifically, we would like to thank John Ritterpusch, Kevin Main Website: construction.com Morrow and Jaclyn Toole from NAHB, as well as members of NAHB’s Sustain- Dodge: construction.com/dodge ability & Green Building Subcommittee; Jane Sumner and Celena Friday from Research & Analytics: Waste Management; and Todd Bachelder and Alan Wall from Menck Windows construction.com/dodge/ for their individual support. dodge-market-research.asp Architectural Record: archrecord.com We also thank all the organizations that talked to us about their projects and Engineering News-Record: enr.com shared photos so that we could highlight a few exemplary examples of green Sweets and SNAP: sweets.com homes in practice. SmartMarket Reports: construction.com/market_research

National Association of Home Builders www.nahb.org

Contributing Partners Nonprofit Organizations Menck Windows: www.menckwindows.com Alliance to Save Energy: www.ase.org Waste Management: www.wm.com American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy: www.aceee.org Federal Government The American Institute of Architects: www.aia.org U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org Standards and Technology (NIST): www.nist.gov Database of State Initiatives for Renewables U.S. Department of Energy and Efficiency: www.dsireusa.org Producedn Main with website support: www.energy.gov from Global Green USA: www.globalgreen.org n Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Green Building Initiative: www.thegbi.org Energy (EERE): www.eere.energy.gov International Code Council: www.iccsafe.org n Building America Program: National Institute of Building Sciences: www.nibs.org www.buildingamerica.gov New Buildings Institute: www.newbuildings.org n Lawrence Berkeley National Lab: www.lbl.gov Southface Energy Institute: www.southface.org n National Renewable Energy Lab: www.nrel.gov U.S. Green Building Council: www.usgbc.org n Pacific Northwest National Lab: www.pnl.gov U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Other Resources: Development: www.hud.gov Building Green, Inc.: www.buildinggreen.com U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: www.epa.gov Green Builder Magazine: www.greenbuildermag.com Energy Star: www.energystar.gov Home Innovation Research Labs: WaterSense: www.epa.gov/watersense www.homeinnovation.com ■ Design and Construction Intelligence SmartMarket Report www.construction.com

McGraw Hill Construction SmartMarket Reports™ Get smart about the latest industry trends. For more information on these reports and others, visit www.construction.com ⁄market_research