Green Building Elements

Sometimes, some of the greenest solutions come from the simplest of ideas.  Take the cottage community.  What could be simpler than the idea of building houses that are radically smaller in square footage than the national average?  Not everyone wants all that extra space, and many would rather have a smaller home built well than a cheaply made box full of emptiness.

Cottage communities are not yet widely known in planning and development.  Cottage communities are primarily located in the Pacific Northwest, though there are indications of interest, if not actual communities yet built, in other parts of the country.

The individual cottages have a small footprint.  The first cottage community built in Langley WA had half the cottages no bigger than 800 square feet, and the other half no bigger than 700 square feet.  These homes are far smaller than the average size house in the U.S. (which was almost 2,400 square feet in 2004).

Cottages serve a niche community.  Obviously, a family of more than 3 or 4 people would start to feel crowded living the typical American lifestyle in such a space.  But many households have only one or two people, and a 700-800 square foot house is perfectly adequate for them.

Cottages work best where several cottages can be placed near one another.  If you still require a full size lot for every home, a cottage doesn’t really do anything towards reducing sprawl.  But a cottage development typically has twice the number of houses as would normally be permitted.  So a piece of land that could normally accommodate four houses can be developed with eight cottages.  By developing as a community, cottages also benefit from common amenities such as landscaping and shared parking areas.  (The small size of the cottages precludes attaching garages to them.)

While cottages reduce the amount of land needed for development, they also reduce the volume of resources needed in their construction.  It is intuitively obvious that an 800 square foot cottage takes much less material, from studs and shingles to pipes and cupboards, than an average sized 2,400 square foot home.  In addition to all that material saved, the smaller cottages also need fewer resources to keep them heated and cooled.

Cottage communities can break up the texture of an otherwise undifferentiated development, and provide opportunities for other kinds of owners to be added into the housing mix.  While they serve the needs of a limited part of the population, they can contribute to better communities with just a simple idea.

See other related Green Building Elements stories:
Green Communities, Part 1: New Urbanism
Traditional Neighborhood Development and LEED Go Hand in Hand
Living Green in the 21st Century

images via: The Cottage Company

The LEED for New Construction rating system awards a total of 69 points in 6 categories: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, and Innovation and Design.

The project obtaining the most LEED points (for new construction) has, until recently, been the Aldo Leopold Legacy Center in Wisconsin, which received 61 points. But last week, Phase I of the Dockside Green development in Victoria, British Columbia, set a new point record. (Green Building Elements first covered the Dockside Green project in February.) Read the rest of this entry »

“Workforce housing” is a term being heard more and more, used place of the more familiar “affordable housing”. It differentiates between housing that is intended to accommodate people from the lowest income brackets, and housing for the lower middle class, people who have steady employment but have been priced out of the housing market in many areas.

According to Wikipedia, workforce housing has four defining elements:

• Affordability
• Home Ownership
• Key Workforce (in other words, composed of critical members of a community’s workforce such as police officers and teachers), and
• Proximity (to employment centers)

Read the rest of this entry »

The Pacific Northwest has always been progressive.

For Seattle in the spring of 1950, that meant the opening of the country’s first mall. According to HistoryLink, Northgate Mall, located on 62 acres outside the city limits, was built to accommodate a total of 80 stores clustered around a “wide shopping walkway,” although it was not fully enclosed and climate-controlled until 1974. (Confused shoppers reportedly parked in the mall space itself when the center first opened.) By 1968, 50,000 cars a day were using Northgate.

In the face of global warming and climate change, however, planners and designers are redefining ‘progressive’. The Northgate neighborhood is currently at the center of a major revitalization effort which was set in motion in 2003 by Mayor Nickels and the Seattle City Council. A major portion of the project, Thornton Place, is scheduled for completion next spring (with condominium sales beginning as early as September of this year). Created by real estate development and management company Lorig, this will be a sustainable, mixed-use village which will combine retail and residential zones with parks and green space. Read the rest of this entry »

Infill housing.

Drive through Seattle and this term will begin to seem synonymous with plain woodframe structures that crowd the streets like like weeds.

According to an article in the Seattle P-I,

Townhomes don’t have to be ugly and dampen the human spirit. But so many of them are eyesores that townhomes have become a lighting rod in the local debate over housing. They’ve been blamed for the decline of community and called a threat to single-family neighborhoods. Their rapid proliferation has even prompted recent City Council-led community forums… [But] townhomes aren’t the problem. … Bad design and laziness are the real problem.

There is also growing concern that the new crop of townhomes is not sustainable (for a discussion of this, as well as a thourough recounting of Seattle’s recent forum on townhomes, see Smarter Neighbors: Seattle Land Use Blog, Seattle Channel’s Planning, Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee, and the West Seattle Blog). Read the rest of this entry »

Smaller homes are more energy efficient generally, and consume fewer resources for their construction. In the United States, the average house size has been skyrocketing in the past few decades from 983 square feet in 1950 to almost 2,350 square feet in 2004.

Smaller buildings are potentially more affordable, are better suited to livable neighborhoods, and serve the needs of smaller families (while our houses have more than doubled in size since 1950, the size of the average family has actually decreased in that same period). There are already developers who understand this, but sometimes, the municipalities make it impossible to build smaller homes.

Marty Pieroni, a developer in Kuna, Idaho was turned down on his request to build some houses smaller than the 1,400 square foot minimum set by the city. With rising energy costs and the current housing credit crunch, there is an increasing demand for smaller, more efficient houses. But the city government (whose tax base is determined by the value of the developed property within its bounds) does not want to allow smaller properties and has turned down the request.

Read the rest of this entry »

“When will I find a green home in my price range?”

It’s a question often heard from sustainability devotees who have been keeping an eye on the growth of the green housing market, yet still find themselves priced out due to the amount of up-front investment that is required when building green.

LEED ND Addresses Affordability

But the subject of affordability has finally entered the green building dialogue. The LEED ND rating system, which will go public early next year, has established a definition of sustainability that goes beyond energy savings. In addition to awarding points based on urban planning criteria such as utilization of infill sites and proximity to public transit, LEED ND also awards points based on affordability. Its Pilot Version Rating System awards 1-2 points (out of a possible 106 total points) for making “Affordable For-Sale Housing,” and offers three options for obtaining those points:

• Option 1: At least 10% of for-sale housing is priced for households up to 80% of the area median income (1 point),
• Option 2: At least 20% of for-sale housing is priced for households up to 120% of the area median income (1 point), or
• Option 3: At least 10% of for-sale housing is priced for households up to 80% of the area median income and an additional 10% of for-sale housing is priced for households at up to 120% of the area median income (2 points).

A Portland Neighborhood Earns Points for Affordability

Helensview Homes in Portland, OR, which recently received LEED ND Gold certification, is an example of a neighborhood that earned points for being affordable. The Helensview neighborhood was created by non-profit developer Home Ownership a Street at a Time (HOST); HOST’s homes are marketed to low- to moderate-income families, with the intention of helping renters become first-time homeowners. HOST has built more than 300 affordable homes in the Portland area since 1991. The Helensview neighborhood is presently under construction, and the current price range for one of these 2, 3, or 4 bedroom houses is $189,000 - $244,000. According to a May 2008 article in Sustainable Life, the median price for a home price in Portland is $339,900. Read the rest of this entry »

In my post of May 6th, “Traditional Neighborhood Development and LEED Go Hand in Hand,” I made the point that smart growth and new urbanism are helping give a ‘boost’ to green building practices. While conducting research for that article, however, I did find several assertions to the contrary.  So, for the sake of playing devil’s advocate, I will here take a look at some of those assertions. Read the rest of this entry »

[There are a number of different approaches to communities and building that serve to support sustainability (and often other aims at the same time; sustainable strategies are almost invariably diverse and multi-faceted in the benefits they offer). Over the next few weeks, I intend to take a look at a number of these types of communities and the ways each of them contribute to improving overall sustainability.]

New Urbanism (sometimes referred to as Traditional Neighborhood Design) is a movement spearheaded by the The Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU). Its goals are “promoting walkable, neighborhood-based development as an alternative to sprawl. CNU takes a proactive, multi-disciplinary approach to restoring our communities.” Improving sustainability is one of the Principles of New Urbanism (see below),additionally, New Urbanism advocates a number of benefits. Although there are broad overlaps between using historical, traditional housing forms (or, unfortunately more often, faux-historical looking buildings) and New Urbanist principles, there is nothing magical about gabled roofs and wood siding, and New Urbanism does not require retro-styled throwbacks (although many examples of it do combine visual historical revivalism with the good community principles it supports).

Much of the attention we pay to green building deals with the parts and pieces and how our buildings work. Greener buildings use less energy for thermal comfort (heating and cooling) and less energy for lighting and draw on fewer resources (and less impact from the materials that are used) in their construction. All of these are good and useful steps to take. However, all of this just takes into account the building itself, and perhaps the site it rests upon. With this kind of focus (or lack thereof) one could envision a community of dispersed “green” buildings all individually well designed and well made, but, in the aggregate, contributing hugely to the destruction of habitat, the depletion of resources, and the net degradation of the environment.

Read the rest of this entry »

The High Point neighborhood in Seattle, Washington — a mixed-use, mixed-income community that is seven miles from the space needle — has been winning national awards since its redevelopment began in 2003. At the end of 2007, it achieved worldwide recognition, receiving the Urban Land Institute’s 2007 Global Award for Excellence.

Before its redevelopment, the 120-acre site was occupied by barracks-style housing that had been built to accommodate wartime workers at Boeing. Then the Seattle Housing Authority, a public corporation that provides affordable housing to over 25,500 people, initiated a renewal effort that resulted in the largest sustainable mixed-use urban neighborhood in the U.S. Read the rest of this entry »