Editor’s Note: Join us for the Affordable Housing Summit on June 17th, 2021! This year we are focusing on the residents and will talk about working with communities to build housing that improves the quality of life for the residents and for the broader neighborhood. We will dig in on topics like inclusive community engagement, trauma-informed design, biophilic design, healthy materials, and how to finance it all.

Guide for Greener QAPS: ILFI Releases New Resource for Affordable Housing Advocates

The Living Building Challenge Affordable Housing Program includes a deep collaboration between the International Living Future Institute (ILFI or the Institute) and a leadership cohort of affordable housing developers and designers. The Institute is working to identify strategies to overcome social, regulatory, and financial barriers to providing equitable, healthy, and environmentally sustainable affordable housing.

Many affordable housing projects receive a significant portion of their funding through federal low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) programs administered by state housing finance agencies (HFAs). Once or twice a year, state housing finance agency tax credit programs accept project applications and distribute awards. To aid in the selection process, HFAs create qualified allocation plans (QAPs), typically with lists of criteria and associated point values. These QAPs have a significant influence on the type of housing that gets built and can be used to incentivize certain building types and features. Many HFAs have found that adding sustainability criteria to their QAPs can be an effective method to encourage projects to consider health and energy efficiency. 

Through its Affordable Housing Program and in partnership with many local partners, ILFI has spent three years working with HFAs around the country to incentivize sustainability and healthy materials in affordable housing projects through state QAPs. Where applicable, we focus on advocating for the integration of programs like the Living Building Challenge, Zero Energy Certification, Declare, and Enterprise Green Communities into HFA funding programs to ensure that affordable housing financing encourages energy efficient and healthy housing through the use of rigorous and accessible standards. 

Over the course of this three year effort, the Institute established relationships with and advocated to eleven state HFAs and one district, as shown below. 

ILFI Outreach, summarized by state or district: Alaska, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington

The Institute learned many lessons over the course of this outreach and advocacy effort, and decided to incorporate all of our lessons learned into a toolkit for our volunteers and other interested members of the Architecture / Engineering / Construction community that may be unfamiliar with how to get involved in the QAP process.The Guide for Greener QAPs. summarizes the partnership and advocacy process into eight steps, and illustrates how our network of volunteers can join with existing on-the-ground advocates in their own state to provide financial incentives for Living Affordable Housing. The eight steps are:

STEP 1: Read Through the Existing QAP

STEP 2: Make Contact

STEP 3: Establish Timeline + Gather Insight

STEP 4: Develop a Strategy

STEP 5: Tailor Language

STEP 6: Make the Case

STEP 7: Implement

STEP 8: Monitor Success + Review Updates

To read more about each step and to review case studies from around the country, download the Guide for Greener QAPs for free from the ILFI website. 

Learn more about water, the Living Building Challenge, and the latest trends in green building, at this year’s Living Future 2021: Inclusion + Unity conference, April 20-23.

The International Living Future Institute (ILFI) is proud to announce the release of our newest report for the green building community, A Decision-Maker’s Guide to Cost-Effective Residential Potable Water Reduction in Seattle, WA.

This guide is designed to be used by developers (affordable housing and market-rate), designers, builders, and homeowners in Seattle who are interested in reducing potable water use at a variety of residential scales (single-family houses, 30-unit buildings, and 100-unit buildings). In order to create the greatest positive environmental, health, and economic benefits, it is critical that these decision-makers and implementers are able to identify the best strategies to use on their projects within the wide variety of options and opportunities available to them. 

This guide aids in this decision-making process by: 

• Exploring three different project scales and presenting the most appropriate and cost-effective potable water reduction strategies for each. 
• Presenting complex decision criteria that can be used by project teams contemplating these systems in an easy-to-digest matrix for each residential building scale. 
• Providing case studies and lessons learned from multiple residential projects from the point of view of the owners, engineers, architects, and maintenance providers. 

The guide can be downloaded for free on ILFI’s website.

For those hoping to engage more deeply with the findings from the report, ILFI is also offering a free two-hour webinar on Thursday, March 25 from 9 a.m. – 11 a.m. PST. The live virtual event will feature a summary of the key findings, case study presentations by project team members of projects included in the guide, as well as the opportunity to delve into scale-specific potable water reduction strategies in small breakout groups.

This guide and the accompanying event was made possible thanks to funding generously provided by the Loom Foundation, Sustainable Path Foundation, and the City of Seattle.

Creating Policy Conditions for A New Decade of Regenerative Buildings

In response to the urgent crisis presented by climate change, small and large governments around the world are using the beginning of a new decade to look at fresh ways to address environmental issues through policymaking. Recognizing buildings as huge contributors to carbon emissions (averaging 40% of the global total), these jurisdictions are setting aggressive targets and exploring ways to dramatically cut back on the negative impact of the buildings developed within their boundaries.

During the same transitional time, we at the International Living Future Institute (ILFI) are excited to offer programs like the Living Building Challenge, Core Green Building Certification, and Zero Carbon Certification, which provide a compelling vision for meeting these climate goals. Yet, we often find ourselves watching our project teams struggle to demonstrate the return on investment of these buildings due to the current market system, one that values the externalization of negative environmental impacts and neglects the positive (but difficult to calculate) benefits of climate justice, health, and equity.

As Manager of the Policy team at ILFI, it is my job to play matchmaker for these two opportunities – local jurisdictions can provide the value and bridge the funding gap for developers with incentives for buildings that pursue our programs. Successful incentives we’ve seen around the country include additional density (where green buildings are given density bonuses ranging from 10 – 25 percent), expedited permitting (where permits for green buildings move to the top of the pile), and zoning flexibility (which exempts green buildings from zone-specific parking or density requirements). In exchange for this low or no-cost option, jurisdictions are able to achieve their carbon goals—plus water, equity and health goals—for the built environment with verified performance from ILFI. And finally, developers are left with a proforma that works for them. It’s the kind of symbiotic and collaborative partnership we need more of in 2020 if we’re going to make the necessary strides toward a Living Future.

As an example, we need look no further than ILFI’s home base, where our partnership with the City of Seattle resulted in the successful implementation of the Seattle Living Building Pilot Program (LBPP). First passed in 2009 and updated several times since then, the LBPP provides height and density incentives for buildings in exchange for meeting Petal or Living Certification under the Living Building Challenge. The City provided this path in the Land Use Code in order to stimulate innovation, encourage models of high performance, and, crucially, to meet their goal of becoming a carbon-neutral city by 2050. Two buildings have successfully completed the pilot (including the Bullitt Center, ILFI’s headquarters!) and six buildings are in various stages of permitting and construction, including a senior care facility, a large commercial office building, and what would be the first Energy Petal Certified multifamily residential project.

ILFI was intimately involved during this ten-year policymaking process, and we learned a lot about what it takes to make a successful incentive program. We learned that finding the appropriate type and level of incentive is difficult to establish without a deep understanding of local development conditions, and that achieving the right incentives is crucial for the efficacy of the program. We learned that it takes time—lots of it—to build the relationships necessary to pass and implement a program like this. And we learned that we simply can’t do all of this on our own if we want to achieve the considerable advances demanded by the crisis we face. Up until recently, the legislative incentives for Living Buildings had come as a result of isolated efforts on the part of forward-thinking municipalities, motivated volunteers and catalyst projects. The Institute long supported these endeavors, while recognizing that it requires substantial time and resources to educate, assist and support the efforts. To accelerate the change we seek, we knew we had to leverage the power of the Living Future Network and provide them with the tools they needed to be effective.

So last year, with the help of some generous land use lawyers and municipal advisors who volunteered their time, we created a Model Incentive Ordinance Template. This seventeen-page document borrows language from successful deep green building incentive programs from around the country and compiles them into a handy plug-and-play format. It’s like Mad Libs, but instead of coming up with a silly story at the end, you have your own incentive program!

After the soft launch of this resource, the template found its way into the hands of volunteers around the world—from San Diego to D.C., Dallas to Detroit, Barcelona to Trinidad and Tobago, and dozens of cities in between. We knew from experience that sample language, though a huge advantage, would not be all that was necessary to get these incentive programs across the finish line. So we packaged the template in a resource we call the Toolkit for Policy Leadership. The Toolkit includes a guide for implementing local policy change, a list of sample incentives and when they might be applicable, and a selection of case studies from around the country.

The Toolkit also includes guidance for the creation of municipal commitments for those jurisdictions that want to lead with their own capital projects. For example, Santa Monica passed a 2017 ordinance requiring all City-owned new construction building projects that exceed 10,000 square feet to meet ILFI’s Zero Energy Certification. We need many more jurisdictions similarly willing to put their own real estate on the line in order to demonstrate their commitment and model what’s possible in their community.

Though we have now empowered members of our network to execute their own local incentives, the advent of 2020 doesn’t mean I’ve decided I can kick back and watch the success stories pour in. I still work actively with volunteers around the country to tweak their incentives, garner letters of support from other project teams and members of their community, address questions about implementation, and draft public statements for them to use while testifying.

I also offer support on behalf of the Institute for legislation championed by our partners around the world, as long as the effort is aligned with our Policy Priorities. This list of Policy Priorities reflects our vision for a Living Future—one in which project teams are not penalized for removing Red List toxins from their materials or implementing on-site water reuse systems, but are rewarded for it. One in which a combustion-free building is not an anomaly, but a requirement for new development.

To that end, we have publicly supported and advocated for policies to remove flame retardant requirements from code language in California, brought rulemaking legislation for new performance-based water reuse pathways to the Oregon and Washington state Congresses, and partnered with Seattle Councilmember Mike O’Brien to require all new buildings in Seattle to be all-electric.

So, what now? Beyond supporting our volunteers with their local incentives, working through implementation details with our motivated municipal partners that have made capital commitments, and advocating for policies that are aligned with our priorities, I try to keep my eye out for ways to leverage our programs against existing legislation. For example, New York City (my current home) just passed some of the most aggressive climate legislation targeting buildings in the world. Local Law 97, also known as the Climate Mobilization Act, places strict emission limits on all buildings (commercial and residential, new and existing) over 25,000 square feet. If building owners exceed these emission limits, which decrease over time, they face steep fines. I worked with Haley Gardner, our Zero Energy Specialist, to develop a calculator that potential project teams can use to see if their project meets our Core Energy requirement after meeting the emissions cap per LL97. This calculator can be used as a tool to encourage the development of more Core Green Buildings in New York City!

As we enter this new decade, I am convinced of a few things. First, I know that the climate crisis we are facing is larger and more imminent than many of us ever thought possible. Second, I know that ILFI’s programs are necessary to address the energy, water, health and equity implications of the built environment in this crisis. Third, I know that we cannot do it alone. We at ILFI are unable to create the mechanics which will magically make Living Buildings cheaper than conventional buildings. As long as our economy privileges the externalization of environmental impacts over the health and wellbeing of its watersheds and its community members, this will remain the case. However, there are forces in our society that are designed to manipulate these variables in order to create a more livable world, and I believe that local government (at its best!) is one of those forces. The creation of incentives and requirements for deep green buildings like those certified by ILFI are essential to creating a Living Future. I hope you’ll join me in my efforts to develop, inform, and advocate for policies such as these in 2020 and beyond.

Want to implement your own local incentive program? Check out the Toolkit for Policy Leadership.
Ready to create your own incentive legislation? Request the Model Incentive Ordinance Template.
Have a local policy that needs ILFI’s support? Make sure it aligns with our Policy Priorities, then email advocacy@living-future.org
Want to use our LL97 comparison calculator? Email advocacy@living-future.org

On June 25, 2018 the Seattle City Council passed an update to the current Seattle Living Building Pilot Program (LBC Pilot), alongside the creation of the new 2030 Challenge High Performance Existing Buildings Pilot Program (2030 Challenge Pilot). The update included increased incentives and a clarification to the penalty structure that will streamline the process of developing Living Buildings in the city. In addition, the council included a directive to Seattle Public Utilities requiring the investigation into a new water reuse policy.

On July 2, Seattle Mayor Jenny A. Durkan signed the LBC Pilot update and new 2030 Challenge Pilot programs, signaling further commitment from the city to support the development of Living Buildings and 2030 Challenge projects.

Increased Incentives:

Both the density and height incentives were increased in this update. Now, projects renovating unreinforced masonry structures will receive 30 percent more Floor Area Ratio (FAR) than the zone allows. The FAR bonus for all other projects was increased from 15 percent to 25 percent.

Additional height has been raised to 12.5 feet (for zones with height limits less than 85 feet) and 25 feet (for zones over 85 feet) for residential buildings. Commercial buildings have been raised to 15 and 30 feet (both residential and commercial incentives were previously 10 and 20 feet depending on the respective zone). This refinement acknowledges the difference in standard floor-to-floor heights for residential and commercial structures as well as provides more generous floor height for the additional one or two stories.

Penalty Structure Clarification

The ordinance includes a new penalty formula structure should the project fall short of the requirements. The new formulas are intended to be more transparent and lend themselves to a more predictable approach that provides developers with a clearer understanding of potential fines. If a project barely misses the energy target by a fraction of a percent, the penalty is proportionate and the project is not penalized the full 5 percent of the construction value.

About the 2030 Challenge Pilot

The new 2030 Challenge Pilot is intended to preserve historic and existing buildings while incentivizing them to pursue efficiency measures during renovation. The International Living Future Institute worked closely with the Seattle 2030 District and Seattle Department of Construction and Inspection to define “existing buildings” in a way that produces clarity for projects choosing between the 2030 Challenge Pilot and the LBC Pilot.

New construction and existing building renovations continue to be eligible for the LBC Pilot. The 2030 Challenge Pilot applies only to existing building renovations. In order to qualify for the 2030 Challenge Pilot, buildings in zones with height limits of 85 feet or less must already be at least 47 percent of the height limit of the zone. Additions to the building footprint cannot exceed 20 percent of the existing footprint area. Buildings in zones over 85 feet must be at least 60 percent of the height limit, and again cannot exceed 20 percent of the existing footprint area. Buildings qualifying for the new 2030 Challenge Pilot must comply with the provisions for substantial alterations and maintain the opaque portions of all exterior walls, or the superstructure of existing structures. Any scale of existing building may pursue the LBC Pilot in order to receive the incentives.

Water Reuse Policy

Inspired by the leadership of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the updated ordinance also includes a directive to Seattle Public Utilities for the development of a Water Reuse Policy. The council expressed interest in a program that would require or incentivize innovative strategies to reuse water that would reduce demand for potable water in new development. Living Buildings face significant regulatory barriers, many of which center around water systems permitting. Replacing these barriers with policy leadership that will make it easier—rather than harder—for truly green buildings is a noteworthy endeavor. Seattle Public Utilities will prepare a report on this topic by December 2018.

Ultimately, the updates included in this bill will serve as a catalyst for the development of Living Buildings throughout Seattle. Continuing the city’s leadership in maintaining a relevant LBC Pilot is important for a holistic approach to meet livability and resiliency goals in addition to key implementation targets outlined in the Seattle Climate Action Plan.

Shoreline City Council adopts a Deep Green Incentive Program (DGIP) to continue the regenerative design momentum in the Puget Sound Region.

Just in time for Earth Day, the Shoreline City Council adopted a Deep Green Incentive Program (DGIP) on April 17, 2017. The DGIP establishes a tiered incentive program for Living and Deep Green Buildings in the City of Shoreline and removes regulatory barriers via code departures.

The Deep Green Incentive Program acts as an important tool for furthering Shoreline’s implementation of advanced sustainability within the built environment to meet city-wide goals, and positions the City as a regional and international leader.  Shoreline’s incentive program is serving as a model for King County’s regional code collaboration, as participating municipalities share expertise to facilitate the adoption of the Living Building Challenge and other green building programs. It also encourages developers who are transforming the City to construct to the built environment’s most rigorous performance standard – the Living Building Challenge (LBC) and Living Community Challenge (LCC). The program also recognizes USGBC’s LEED Platinum certification, as well as the regional Built Green’s Emerald and 5-Star ratings for residential projects.

The Shoreline program is tiered such that projects that achieve all Imperatives of the LBC or LCC Certification are designated as Tier 1; those that achieve Petal Certification under LBC or LCC or meet Built Green’s Emerald Star rating are assigned Tier 2; and projects that meet ILFI’s Net Zero Energy Building Certification combined with the Salmon Safe Certification, USGBC’s LEED Platinum rating or Built Green’s 5-Star rating fall under Tier 3.

These projects are then eligible for incentives corresponding to the appropriate tier, which provides higher levels of incentives for the more rigorous programs. These incentives include a waiver for 100%, 75% or 50% of City-imposed pre-application and permit application fees for Tier 1, 2 and 3 respectively; a reduced Transportation Impact Fee; expedited permit review without additional fees; and various departures from Development Code requirements such as density and height bonuses based on tier and zone. In keeping with the Institute’s commitment to proven performance, all projects in Tier 1 and 2 must demonstrate some post-occupancy performance through a one-year period in order to satisfy incentive requirements.

Shoreline’s adoption of the DGIP marks the continued commitment of municipalities around the country to build a living future by including the Living Building Challenge (LBC) and Living Community Challenge (LCC) in their suite of new green building incentives.