Evergreen Standard Issues
Greg Black
your comments.
1. Down-payment-assistance programs for existing housing are
problematic when it comes to the Evergreen Standard. How should the
Evergreen Standard apply to those programs?
2. The Evergreen Standard started development over 3 years ago. The
current version except for some minor tweaks is over 2 years old.
What substantive changes, updates, or additions should we make so that
it works for another 2 to 3 years given pending new code changes and
other developments in the sustainable development field?
3. How can we help to facilitate project sponsors making the change
to a true integrated design process?
grace kim
rehabs. I'm not saying that the requirements should go away or be
less stringent. It's just that some of the requirements don't make
sense when literally applied to rehab projects. I would propose
forming an advisory group consisting of architects who have
experienced challenges in trying to design to the current standards.
Areas I've specifically had challenges with were related to envelope/
insulation requirements based on window/siding replacement as well as
allowable glazing ratios for small square footage additions.
Greg Black
special attention on rehab especially on increasing the energy
efficiency baseline when the new energy code goes into effect. I
assume that the Evergreen Standard will remain at 15% more efficient
than code. Any architects or other interested affordable housing
practioners who want to work on this -- please let me know.
>
> - Show quoted text -
deChadenedes, John
2. The main elements neglected by Evergreen and by LEED are durability, low maintenance, and ease of replacement. In the context of housing expected to perform well throughout a 50-year contract, these are very serious considerations and I'd like to see the baseline "green" standard include more about this. (An obvious example is windows. A project may include good quality energy efficient windows with an expected useful life of 20 years. What's going to happen when they have to be replaced? Can the building envelope be restored to its original functioning? If not, low points! Another example is siding. The best possible choice would be something that lasts more than 50 years with no maintenance and never needs painting. Anything less should receive a lower score.)
3. We could facilitate the shift to an integrated design process by determining which elements are most important to the sustainable operation of an affordable housing project and phasing in requirements that lead to analysis of these elements, moving on to less significant elements. For example, step one might be to require, along with a funding application, a life-cycle cost analysis of three alternatives for the roof, the siding, and the heating/ventilating system for any proposed building. This would be accompanied by explanation of how the selected alternative for each element was chosen and how its selection is related to the maintenance costs and replacement reserves assumed in the operating pro forma.
John deChadenedes | Coordinator, Housing Finance Program | 206.263.9081 | john.dec...@kingcounty.gov | (pronounced "de SHAH de ned")
Greg Black
of components should be a sustainable consideration as well as ease of
replacement. Connecting choice of materials or sytems to maintenance
costs and reserves through life cycle analyis is also a great way to
evaluate what is really the lowest cost option over time. Any
architects out there who can give us some observations about how much
work these might be?
On Oct 16, 3:16 pm, "deChadenedes, John"
> First thoughts, Greg:
>
> 2. The main elements neglected by Evergreen and by LEED are durability, low maintenance, and ease of replacement. In the context of housing expected to perform well throughout a 50-year contract, these are very serious considerations and I'd like to see the baseline "green" standard include more about this. (An obvious example is windows. A project may include good quality energy efficient windows with an expected useful life of 20 years. What's going to happen when they have to be replaced? Can the building envelope be restored to its original functioning? If not, low points! Another example is siding. The best possible choice would be something that lasts more than 50 years with no maintenance and never needs painting. Anything less should receive a lower score.)
>
> 3. We could facilitate the shift to an integrated design process by determining which elements are most important to the sustainable operation of an affordable housing project and phasing in requirements that lead to analysis of these elements, moving on to less significant elements. For example, step one might be to require, along with a funding application, a life-cycle cost analysis of three alternatives for the roof, the siding, and the heating/ventilating system for any proposed building. This would be accompanied by explanation of how the selected alternative for each element was chosen and how its selection is related to the maintenance costs and replacement reserves assumed in the operating pro forma.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Here are some Evergreen Standard topics on which I would like to see
> > > your comments.
>
> > > 1. Down-payment-assistance programs for existing housing are
> > > problematic when it comes to the Evergreen Standard. How should the
> > > Evergreen Standard apply to those programs?
>
> > > 2. The Evergreen Standard started development over 3 years ago. The
> > > current version except for some minor tweaks is over 2 years old.
> > > What substantive changes, updates, or additions should we make so that
> > > it works for another 2 to 3 years given pending new code changes and
> > > other developments in the sustainable development field?
>
> > > 3. How can we help to facilitate project sponsors making the change
> > > to a true integrated design process?- Hide quoted text -
>