You are here: Home » Featured

Category: Featured

RICS Study: No Premium for LEED-Certified Commercial Office Buildings

Last week, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (“RICS”) released the results of a study authored by Piet Eichholtz and Nils Kok of Maastricht University and John Quigley of Berkeley. Titled “Doing Well By Doing Good? An Analysis of the Financial Performance of Green Office Buildings in the USA,” the purpose of the study was to determine whether investors are currently willing to pay any premium for green (Energy Star- and LEED-certified) commercial office buildings and, if so, what that premium is. The authors identified 1360 buildings- 286 LEED-certified, 1045 Energy Star-certified, and 29 certified under both systems- and were able to obtain complete building characteristics and monthly rents from CoStar for 649 of them, as well as sales data for 199 buildings that swapped hands between 2004 and 2007. To create a pool of peer buildings, the authors used the CoStar database to identify all other office buildings within a quarter mile radius of the subject green building to create a “cluster” of buildings for each of the 893 subject buildings. The study concluded that “the type of label matters. We find consistent and statistically significant effects in the marketplace for the Energy Star-labeled buildings. We find no significant market effects associated with the LEED label. Energy Star concentrates on energy use, while the LEED label is much broader in scope. Our results suggest that tenants and investors are willing to pay more for an energy-efficient building, but not for a building advertised as ’sustainable’ in a broader sense.”

Apr 07, 2009 | 7 comments | View Post

NAIOP Responds to Critics by Making Case for Incentives to Boost Efficiency in Commercial Office Buildings

I took great interest in a number of the documents that NAIOP released in the aftermath of its controversial energy efficiency study. The organization has compiled both an FAQ and fact sheet detailing the various assumptions it made and conclusions it drew in an effort to clarify some of the unproductive vitriol that has flown around the web over the past month decrying its conclusion that 30 percent energy reductions are not practicable for the majority of commercial office properties. Both the fact sheet and FAQ are available on NAIOP’s web site and point out that the results of the study do not apply to all buildings; “[t]he study analyzes a typical office building that represents more than 50 percent of new Class A construction [that took place] in 2008.” NAIOP also clarifies that the subject building is a real 95,000-square-foot, speculative commercial office property in California, and claims that the results of its study show what’s possible for the “vast majority of new construction without having to redesign a typical office building,” calling the results “impressive.”

Apr 03, 2009 | 0 comments | View Post

Seattle’s KING 5 Calls Washington Green School Claims “Oversold”

Washington State’s High-Performance Public Buildings Act requires LEED Silver certification or a design that complies with the state’s Sustainable School Design Protocol for schools larger than 5000 square feet. In a video describing the benefits of green schools that is available on the State Superintendent of Public Schools’ web site, certain claims are made about the promise of “clean, high-performance, money-saving schools” that are “a wise business choice for cost conscious schools. Relatively small increases in design and construction costs, usually less than 2 percent, ultimately bring 10 to 15 percent reductions in long-term operating costs.” The folks at KING 5 television in Seattle caught wind of these claims and decided to do some digging; you can view the station’s full report through the link at the bottom of this article. As you might guess, the station concluded that the state’s claims about green building premiums, decreased operating expenses, and higher student test scores were highly exaggerated.

Mar 26, 2009 | 0 comments | View Post

Real Estate Law Issues for Solar Energy: Introduction to Government Incentives

Once the sole domain of the ecologically minded, the green building movement has gone mainstream. Part of the green building movement has been the increase in solar power use in homes and businesses. The decision by homeowners and businesses to install solar electric systems, which are also known as photovoltaic (“PV”) systems, may be made for a variety of reasons. Some want to preserve fossil fuels and reduce air pollution. Some want to invest in an energy producing improvement to their property. Still others like the independence of a solar system, making them less vulnerable to increases in energy prices. A number of government incentives have helped spur this growth of the solar market. However, the increased interest in solar energy and solar systems has created certain real estate law issues, including: (1) the creation of solar easements, (2) restrictive covenants and homeowner’s association requirements, and (3) compliance with zoning and building codes. This article highlights the current state of the solar market and government incentives, with future articles highlighting each of items (1) through (3) above.

Mar 19, 2009 | 1 comment | View Post

Henry Gifford & USGBC’s Brendan Owens Consider Merits of LEED at NESEA Forum

The Northeast Sustainable Energy Association (“NESEA”) held its annual Building Energy conference last week in Boston and sparks apparently flew during a panel discussion that featured Henry Gifford, whose controversial and well-disseminated “Lies, Damn Lies, and… (Another Look at LEED Energy Efficiency)” paper critiqued both LEED generally and the USGBC-promulgated New Buildings Institute study which concluded that LEED buildings were using 30 percent less energy than non-LEED buildings. The panel was moderated by BuildingGreen.com’s Nadav Malin and also included USGBC vice president for LEED technical development Brendan Owens. Boston-based blogger Michael Prager attended the panel and has authored an extremely insightful summary of the event, including quotes from both panelists and audience members. Many of the quotes in Mr. Prager’s article ring particularly salient in light of the uproar over the recent NAIOP study which I noted here at GRELJ last week in the context of using predicted performance as the basis for making building policy decisions. It’s clear that thus far in 2009 there has been a significant shift in attention towards building performance-related issues with respect to both LEED and green building policy generally. As states and municipalities prepare to receive close to $7 billion in stimulus funds to, in part, craft and implement local green building legislation, I think that the substance of the discussion at the NESEA event should become of increasing utility to both stakeholders and policymakers. Of course, as always, it also suggests the overarching importance of vetted contract language in connection with LEED or any other types of green building projects.

Mar 16, 2009 | 2 comments | View Post

Green Building Industry Apoplectic Over NAIOP Commercial Energy Efficiency Study

Ed Mazria said that it was “meant to confuse the public and stall meaningful legislation, insuring that America remains dependent on foreign oil, natural gas and dirty conventional coal.” Lloyd Alter of Treehugger called it “one of the dumbest studies that has crossed our screen in a while.” Danielle Sacks at Fast Company wants to “make sure studies like these don’t make it past their press release.” So what, if anything, are we to make of ConSol’s study, prepared for NAIOP, which concluded that the best possible scenario for energy efficiency improvements to a hypothetical 4-story, 95,000-square-foot office building is 23 percent over the ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Energy Standard? While we continue to wait for more meaningful data about the performance of green buildings, I think the study suggests the danger- for both legislators and stakeholders- of relying on energy modeling of any kind as the basis for policymaking or who agree to assist a green building project in achieving certain energy reductions by the terms of their construction contracts.

Mar 10, 2009 | 6 comments | View Post

Long Island Power Authority to Seek Stimulus Dollars for 50 Megawatts of Green Power

Governor Paterson last Friday announced the results of an RFP that the state issued in April of 2008 for a solar power project on Long Island. BP Solar will build a 36.9 megawatt facility at Brookhaven National Laboratory and enXco a 13.1 megawatt series of installations across public and private properties in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. 50 megawatts of solar power would triple New York State’s current capacity and serve 6500 residential LIPA customers annually. NYSERDA has already given LIPA $15 million for the project while it negotiates power purchase agreements (“PPAs”) with BP and enXco; these agreements typically run for twenty (20) years and contemplate the PPA provider (here, BP and enXco) selling the electricity generated by the installation to a utility company during the course of the agreement. LIPA will make the terms of these particular PPAs available once executed. According to GlobeSt.com, LIPA is attempting to secure stimulus dollars for the project. Note that the project would be eligible for the federal solar power tax credit (extended under TARP through the end of 2016) provided that it is operational before December 31, 2016; the available credit is equal to 30 percent of the cost of the installation and there is no maximum credit limit.

Mar 05, 2009 | 1 comment | View Post

Introduction to the Stimulus Package: Green Building and the Stimulus (Part I)

This is the first of a series of articles here at the Green Real Estate Law Journal on the impact that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 will have on green building generally. Future articles will provide greater detail as to the projects utilizing federal funds in a multitude of states, some unique legal risks associated with these projects, and the disputes that may arise in connection with such projects. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “Recovery Act”) offers multiple opportunities for property owners, developers and other stakeholders in the green building arena. There are tens of billions of dollars in funding initiatives for green building in the Recovery Act. Many of the provisions are complex and the specific projects that are to be have yet to be fully provided. That being said, the commitment to green building is clearly apparent throughout the Recovery Act and a quick summary of the critical green building funding proposals are detailed after the jump.

Mar 03, 2009 | 0 comments | View Post

SB 1473: El Dorado County Fighting California Green Building Legislation

In the aftermath of last year’s AHRI et al. v. City of Albuquerque litigation, there has been an increased level of discussion with respect to how municipalities and states should craft green building policy and legislation. Although I have not been following what’s been taking place in California all that closely, a recent article in the Sacramento Bee noting one California county’s reaction to a newly enacted piece of state-level green building legislation caught my eye. California’s Senate Bill 1473 took effect on January 1 and requires cities and counties in California to collect, on behalf of California’s Building Standards Commission, a building permit application fee. The fee is based on the building’s valuation as determined by the pertinent local building official and is assessed at $1.00 for every $25,000.00 of value. Cities and counties are entitled to keep up to 10 percent of the fee in order to cover their own administrative and enforcement costs; the rest of the funds are sent to a special revolving fund established by SB 1473 which the Commission will use to “fund development of statewide building standards, with emphasis on green building standards.” Officials in El Dorado County (which is about halfway between Sacramento and Lake Tahoe) believe that the fee is illegal, calling it “a tax without calling it a tax.”

Feb 19, 2009 | 0 comments | View Post

Green Leasing Series: The Legal Risks of a Green Lease

Much like the rest of the green building industry, green leases contain a collection of legal risks that landlords and tenants have not previously had to consider. This article considers a small sample of such problems, specifically in relation to certification requirements, cost issues, insurance provisions and green product issues. Many companies and government agencies require their space to satisfy an applicable LEED for Commercial Interiors certification level. These entities look for a lease to specify that the space will meet such standards. Landlords are not generally in the position to guarantee such certification level. The project architect, general contractor, subcontractor and USGBC all have a much greater impact on whether the space meets the required certification level. The landlord will thus need to make sure it is working with contractors and architects that understand the issues and are able to work towards achieving the necessary certification levels. It will need to protect itself in its applicable project contracts. The landlord and tenant must work together in attempting to craft a lease that adequately protects each of their respective interests and avoids liability outside of either of their control.

Feb 17, 2009 | 1 comment | View Post

CoStar, Owner’s Counsel Addressing Liability Aspects of Marketing Green Buildings

Back in January here at GRELJ, I critiqued Andrew Burr of CoStar’s list of the top ten green building stories from 2008 by noting his lack of any reference to the green building litigation and associated risk management issues that began to emerge during the course of last year. Accordingly, I was pleased to see his recent column acknowledging some of the risks inherent with marketing green buildings, both in project-specific materials as well as securities disclosures. In Mr. Burr’s piece, both Paul D’Arelli of Greenberg Traurig and Brian Anderson of Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek (who describes the securities issue in detail in his Understanding the Business of Green article, available via the links below), among others, note the importance of educating owners about the terminology associated with the LEED certification process and the potential legal dangers of misrepresenting a property’s green design features in terms of ultimate building performance.

Feb 10, 2009 | 6 comments | View Post

Green Leasing Series: Introduction to Green Leasing

Much like the term green building, green lease is a term without a widely accepted definition. (Editor’s note: this is a critical point that we will be exploring in detail in future articles in this series). A green lease can take many forms. However, the key concepts in any green lease are: (i) rent structure and operating expenses; (ii) build out of tenant improvements; (iii) sustainable development principles and regulations (throughout the building or larger development); (iv) the use and disposal of hazardous materials, including cleaning supplies; (v) recycling; and (vi) environmental management plans. A green lease will generally detail environmentally friendly products to be used, water and energy conservation methods and targets, the use of alternative sources of energy on-site, such as solar or wind, indoor air quality standards, and dispute resolution procedures.

Feb 06, 2009 | 1 comment | View Post

Green Construction Claims Demonstrate Need for Design Professional Due Diligence

Yesterday, I gave a presentation to a local architecture and interior design firm on current trends in green construction law. I was impressed at how willing the firm’s design professsionals were to listen to my thoughts on the emerging risks associated with green design. In addition to suggesting a number of other legal issues, I selected a handful of claims reported by Maryland-based attorney Frank Musica at the 2007 AIA National Convention in San Antonio to open up a discussion on form contract language – particularly from the AIA documents – and suggested how certain applicable provisions might be amended to reduce the architect’s risk when rendering green design services. The claim that made the biggest splash with my audience yesterday was where Musica reported how an architect failed to perform sufficient due diligence in crafting green building specifications for a particular project and specified what turned out to be a patented solar shading system. After the project was complete, the patent holder approached the owner and demanded a licensing fee for its use of the system. The owner pointed a finger at the architect and sought indemnification under the terms of the parties’ agreement.

Jan 29, 2009 | 10 comments | View Post

The Legal Issues of Green Real Estate Finance

The real estate finance industry has experienced extreme changes in the past eighteen months. The credit crisis and subsequent economic recession have resulted in a severe tightening in the real estate finance market. As a result, the few banks that are still providing financing secured primarily by real estate are able to be far more selective in project selection. Some of these lenders have greatly increased their commitment to providing financing to developers of green buildings. One prominent source of funds has been from Wells Fargo & Company, which has provided more than $2 billion in financing secured by green real estate. As the world financial headquarters has shifted from Wall Street to Washington, D.C., many commentators are expecting that green building will be a common condition of allocation of federally funded real estate projects whether in the form of direct subsidies or grants or public/private partnerships. This article will briefly examine a small portion of the unique legal risks that should be considered by lenders and property owners and developers in regard to obtaining financing for green buildings. It will specifically focus on ways lenders should attempt to mitigate risk through a basic understanding of green building, the careful examination of leases, construction documents and loan document covenants.

Jan 23, 2009 | 1 comment | View Post

Bailout Provides Significant Expansion & Extension of Business Energy Tax Credit

In a previous article here at GRELJ, I discussed the Section 179D Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Tax Deduction, which was extended by the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (again, the formal title for the $700 million federal bailout that was passed back on October 3). As I also noted previously, the Bailout also significantly expands the Business Energy Tax Credit that was previously enacted as Section 48 of the 2005 Energy Policy Act. The duration of available tax credits for solar energy, fuel cell, and microturbine installations has been extended for 8 years until December 31, 2016. The Bailout also increases the available credit amount for fuel cell installations and provides new credits for small wind energy systems, geothermal heat pumps, and combined heat and power systems. Generally speaking, in order to qualify for the Business Energy Tax Credit, the original use of the system must begin with the taxpayer, or the system must be constructed by the taxpayer. It must also meet any performance standards in effect at the time the system is acquired (such as those set forth by the manufacturer). The equipment must also be operational during the year in which the tax credit is claimed in order for the taxpayer to earn the credit. This article provides a brief overview of the available credits for each qualifying type of technology.

Jan 14, 2009 | 0 comments | View Post

Green Building Litigation Notable Omission From CoStar’s Top 10 Green Building News Stories of 2008

Andrew Burr of the CoStar Group recently listed his top ten green building stories from 2008. I thought a glaring omission from his compilation was his failure to include any discussion of either of the green building litigations that surfaced during the course of the year. Shaw Development v. Southern Builders and AHRI et al. v. City of Albuquerque may ultimately become seminal green building law cases, so I was disappointed that Burr’s list focused on mostly cosmetic, feel-good stories like “the LEED economy” and “green building trumps recession,” the latter of which has most certainly not been true in New York City over the past couple of months as a number of green projects have stalled or been canceled outright.

Jan 07, 2009 | 2 comments | View Post

Green Building Liability Piques Interest of Residential Sector

Much of the discussion with respect to the liability issues surrounding sustainable building has focused on the commercial sector, so I was interested to see my friend Brian Anderson, a real estate partner in the Madison, Wisconsin office of Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek S.C, quoted in a brief article suggesting risk management best practices for home builders in a recent article posted by Professional Builder. The article suggests that LEED for Homes and NAHB’s National Green Building Program may soon open the doors for insurance claims and litigation arising out of green projects that do not perform as promised. In the article, Mr. Anderson actually describes a matter his office handled where a builder did not obtain the anticipated level of certification for a residential project. “We were struggling to determine the value of the certification when the claim settled,” he told PB. At least in the commercial context, a jumping off point for plaintiffs who assert these types of claims could be the studies- many of which are promulgated by the USGBC and its constituents- that tout the higher leasing and purchasing figures for LEED-certified buildings.

Dec 22, 2008 | 1 comment | View Post

Surety Industry Continues to Critique Performance Bond Requirements of D.C. Green Building Act

I have often used Washington, D.C.’s 2006 Green Building Act as a paradigm for green building legislation that is enacted quickly, fails to define key terms, or fails to address other important legal ramifications that were not contemplated by the drafters. A little over a year ago over at gbNYC, we linked to a letter that Mark McCallum, general counsel for the National Association of Surety Bond Producers, had written to the D.C. City Council expressing his concerns over certain provisions of the Act. I had been wondering where the NASB’s efforts stood because certain provisions of the Act are scheduled to take effect beginning in January. Accordingly, I was interested to recently see an article in the Washington Business Journal noting that the D.C. Department of the Environment has created a working group in cooperation with the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs to address Mr. McCallum’s concerns.

Dec 17, 2008 | 0 comments | View Post

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008: Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Tax Deduction Extended Through 2013

I had the pleasure earlier today of leading a conference call with Studley to review provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the formal title for the $700 federal bailout that was passed back on October 3, referred to herein as the Bailout) relating to energy efficiency in commercial office buildings. Most of the applicable provisions of the Bailout actually extend existing tax deductions and credits, though it does provide additional incentives that I will detail in a subsequent post. Perhaps the most critical provision for commercial owners, operators, and tenants to note is the Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Tax Deduction, which was enacted back in 2005 as Section 179D of the 2005 Energy Policy Act. Prior to the Bailout, Section 179D was slated to expire at the end of 2008, but has now been extended through December 13, 2013. In this article, I will review Section 179D in detail. A subsequent post will detail the Bailout’s significant expansion of the Business Energy Tax Credit that was previously enacted as Section 48 of the 2005 Energy Policy Act.

Dec 17, 2008 | 2 comments | View Post

Understanding the Business of Green: Special Focus Issue from the Counselors of Real Estate

It is with great pleasure that, in connection with the launch of the Green Real Estate Law Journal, the Counselors of Real Estate and the DePaul University Real Estate Center have allowed me to upload a .pdf copy of the most recent issue of Real Estate Issues, titled Understanding the Business of Green, into this GRELJ post for your review. Many of these articles grew out of presentations at last February’s Managing Risk in Sustainable Building conference in Chicago, which was the first conference in the country exclusively devoted to a detailed discussion of the intersection of risk and green construction. I encourage you to download a copy of the issue (available after the jump) and review it at your leisure. Many thanks to Carol Scherf, the DePaul University Real Estate Center, and the Counselors of Real Estate for allowing me to upload this important work into GRELJ.

Dec 10, 2008 | 0 comments | View Post