I first discovered and joined Urban Green Council’s Emerging Professionals about three years ago when I first moved to the city. I was looking for a job in the architecture industry and wanted to meet like-minded people and share my passion for sustainable design. I felt welcomed into a tight-knit group from my very first meeting and have continued to gain valuable personal and professional relationships ever since this time. I became more and more involved with the group, volunteering to help organize events and making connections with an ever broader group of professionals. The relationships I made quickly introduced me to my current position, architect at Kohn Pedersen Fox, which has afforded me incredible experiences over the last three years.

Continuing to be involved with the Emerging Professionals has led to many leadership opportunities throughout the years. I served as an EP co-chair for one year, learning to engage a broad group of people in new and exciting ways. I moderated a successful panel discussion, Sustainability from the Bottom Up, which gathered industry leaders to to share their insider perspectives and forecasts for the future of green building. It was a great opportunity to interact with more experienced sustainability pros in a very tangible and meaningful way. Most recently, I was elected to the Urban Green Council Board of Directors, serving as the Emerging Professional representative and working to influence the future of the organization and its influence within the industry and city as a whole.

As I transition into the role of an “Emerged Professional,” I continually look back on my three years of experience and am grateful for the support and opportunities offered by the Emerging Professionals and Urban Green Council.  Through my experiences with the group, I have made valuable industry connections, gained valuable professional skills, and honed my leadership abilities. These qualities have easily transitioned into my architectural practice, affording me opportunity to take on more responsibility on projects and within the office. I look forward to many more years ahead working with Urban Green Council and taking this valuable knowledge and experience back to my architectural practice at KPF.

Urban Green Council is introducing a new member level for sustainability-minded recent college grads under 30. The Emerging Professionals membership is now available and has all the benefits of our regular membership. We hope to make this a permanent part of our members structure based on participation, so please sign up today! 

By the end of 2013, over 1,400 New York City buildings will have to comply with Local Law 87: Audits and Retro-commissioning, the second in a series of laws that make up the Greener, Greater Buildings Plan (GGBP).  In requiring buildings 50,000 SF or greater to perform periodic energy audits, the city hopes to encourage energy efficiency retrofits that typically result in significant energy and cost savings.

Buildings that need to comply with LL87 in 2013 must submit Energy Efficiency Reports demonstrating compliance by December 31, and every 10 years thereafter.

Last year, Urban Green created a Local Law 87 Compliance Checklist and User’s Guide to help property managers and owners understand the steps required to comply and get the most out of the process.  With support from NYSERDA and Con Edison, we’ve presented this information free of charge to over 1,000 building owners, managers, and operators.  That’s a lot of people but it’s not nearly enough.  We’ve undertaken a second round of outreach to more effectively pinpoint  property managers and owners who may need added support in complying with the law and re-tuning their buildings.

Here’s what we did:

For a similar educational program on Local Law 84, which required the same group of large buildings to benchmark their energy and water use, we reached out to owners and property managers overseeing the greatest amount of square footage. This methodology was carried over into LL87 outreach but with some slight modifications using lessons learned from the city’s Benchmarking Report  released last year.
First, we looked in detail at compliance rates for benchmarking and found geographic areas where compliance was much lower than the overall rate of 75%. We then reached out to Business Improvement Districts, various Chamber of Commerce locations, and neighborhood associations within these areas.

In addition, we looked at compliance rates by building sector and reached out to associations serving sectors with below-average compliance.

We’re optimistic that our combined efforts will improve compliance rates for LL87 in 2013 and subsequent years (10% of 13,500 affected buildings are required to report each year).

We continue to deliver presentations and share information about the law through our fantastic volunteer speakers bureau and Checklist mentioned above.  Please contact us if you need to find out how to comply.

The GGBP laws are truly a win-win, as they encourage building practices that reduce energy use and carbon pollution, lower operating costs, and create “green” jobs for New Yorkers who specialize in building audits and commissioning.  We think the tools we’ve developed go beyond helping property managers and owners comply with the law, adding value to the process. With an additional 12,000 buildings affected by LL87, we have our work cut out for us!

For more information on Local Law 87 please click here or email us to request an onsite presentation.

The work of the Building Resiliency Task Force, convened at the request of Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn, is now well underway; over 200 members have rolled up their sleeves and taken a first pass at detailed policy proposals.

This week the Task Force Steering Committee is sharing two key documents that chart our progress:

1. Working Group & Committee Guidelines provides a high level statement about our common and differing expectations for the various building sectors (Residential, Commercial, Critical, and    Homes).

2. Summary of Proposals frame the proposals we have heard thus far from the working groups and committees. It’s a summary and conceptual overview; teams are  hard at work on the details that underlay each “big idea.”

As reflected in the Guidelines, there are certain parameters common to all building types, including an expectation to drive change through best practices, removing barriers, and heightening standards for new construction in areas not covered by existing codes.  But we also see very different levels of public interest and obligation for different building types, especially when it comes to retroactive requirements.

On one end of the scale are commercial buildings, where we will largely look to the market and incentives to drive changes in existing buildings. On the other end are critical buildings, which we expect to be fully functional no matter what our changing climate may bring. And somewhere in the middle are residential buildings where some level of functionality is absolutely necessary, though we must balance any requirements against financial hardship.

These documents will guide our work going forward. We look forward to early summer when the Task Force’s work will be complete and we can issue our report and recommendations.

A New York City Council vote today brings us to a new milestone:  40 Green Codes Task Force proposals are now incorporated into laws and practices.

The particular proposal that brought us to this milestone was UE1 – Increasing Biodiversity in Public Landscapes.  In UE1, the Green Codes Task Force was concerned about the impact of public landscaping practices on urban ecology.  Foreign species and monocultures widely used in landscaping tend to displace native plant species, and deprive native birds and other animals of the habitat to which they had been accustomed.  Many of these species also tend to run amok, spreading far beyond the original planting sites.  In addition, many monocultures require intensive irrigation and fertilization, wasting water and polluting the environment.

The law passed today requires the Parks Department to maximize the use of plant species that are native to New York City, where appropriate, and to prohibit the planting of invasive species.  Native species tend to require less water and fertilization, and are more likely to survive drought and disease.  The use of native species also helps preserve our natural ecosystems, which help clean the air we breathe and the water we drink.

The Council also passed a related law requiring that Parks Department plantings help in stormwater control.  The Parks Department is to develop a manual providing information about what plant species and planting materials (i.e., soils) best facilitate stormwater retention, and guidelines for planning and structuring plantings for stormwater management.   This law encourages innovative stormwater management practices, as the GCTF called for in its proposal SW5.

Both the stormwater rules and the native species rules are to be followed in Parks Department plantings starting on May 1, 2014.   The manuals the department develops will also be available on the city’s website for public use.

Now in its second year, the EBie Awards from Urban Green Council, USGBC New York, are a nationwide juried competition for people working in Existing Buildings who have made great strides in improving environmental performance but whose accomplishments may otherwise go unheralded. Like the Oscars, there are multiple awards – but instead of Best Actor (or Best Key Grip) we have categories like Shine A Light On Me for the best lighting retrofit, and The Reformed Drinker for water savings. It’s sustainability in buildings, but sexy, with a glitzy awards ceremony (held at the Hard Rock Cafe Theatre in Times Square) for finalists and winners.

This year, we have added a new award for those people who work in multiple buildings: All Together Now, which recognizes the most improved portfolio across multiple sustainability categories, including water, waste management, stormwater, materials use, indoor environmental quality, and tenant engagement. The award is similar to the The All-Rounder, which is for a single building, but is designed for entrants who own, operate, or manage a group of buildings and improve their combined environmental performance. We expect that some of the biggest real improvements (not per square foot, but total water or energy savings) will come from portfolios, simply due to their size.

Working across a portfolio doesn’t mean you do different things, but it does change how you go about it. On the positive side, there’s lots of opportunity for lessons learned as conservation measures are repeated over and over (and over and over). Economies of scale come into play: once,when buying occupancy sensors for a campus-wide renovation, I found the price dropped by more than half when ordering 1,000 sensors instead of 100. Repetition can improve efficiency as project managers, purchasing agents, suppliers, and contractors develop good habits, and once-innovative processes become routine. And it’s much easier to get project approval from the right people – building occupants and top management – with a proven track record of success within the same portfolio.

Of course, it’s not always easy “scaling up.”  Despite the benefits of experience, it can seem like every situation is unique in its own way. It can be very difficult to give individual projects the attention they deserve when trying to be effective across 10, 100, or even 500 buildings. And going big too fast can have real costs if inventory is purchased and then plans change or deadlines are missed. Finally, the sheer effort required to create change in multiple buildings at once can be daunting right from the outset.

That’s why we created the EBies All Together Now portfolio award – to recognize the special opportunities and challenges that come from managing a portfolio. We’re looking forward to honoring the people making it happen across a group of buildings. If that’s you, go to ebies.org to find more details about how to apply and the definition of award categories and portfolios. The deadline for submissions is February 26, and we’ll be honoring finalists and the winners in New York City on June 19, 2013. See you there!

On December 20, 2012, NYC enacted Local Law 60 of 2012 that requires new residential buildings to provide adequate space to store and segregate refuse and recyclables, implementing the Green Codes Task Force proposal Resource Conservation 2: Provide Recycling Areas in Apartment Buildings. We are hopeful that this measure will help NYC get closer to its peer cities in rates of recycling waste.

In New York, space is always at a premium. Many buildings don’t have enough space to separate the various categories of recyclables, and to keep them separate from general trash. This makes it challenging for building residents and supers to manage the flow of recyclables, so the recyclables tend to get mixed in with the trash. Under the new law, buildings that go up after January 1, 2014 will have to make room to handle recycling properly.

Making something more convenient often means that it will be done better and more often. With space, recycling efforts become more convenient. Currently, New York recycles about 33% of its waste, while Los Angeles recycles over 60% of its total waste and Chicago over 55%. San Francisco, an unsurprising champion in this field, recycles almost 70% of its waste. Making recycling easier in New York’s residential buildings should improve our rates!

For more details about the new requirements, check out the Legislation at a Glance.

At the request of City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Urban Green Council has convened a special Building Resiliency Task Force of leaders in the NYC real estate community. The Task Force is taking an in-depth look at how to better prepare our buildings for future extreme weather events and infrastructure failures, and the grand kickoff was this morning, with Task Force members assembled for the first time.

Held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, over 100 Task Force members gathered to hear Speaker Quinn, Deputy Mayor Cas Holloway, and Commissioner of Buildings Robert LiMandri welcome them and describe the urgency of their work. Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability Director Sergej Mahnovski described some of the challenges facing New York City infrastructure and how this may affect buildings during future extreme events.

Members also learned more about the purview and structure of the Task Force. As described by Russell Unger, Urban Green Council’s Executive Director, the Task Force will consider both direct effects of extreme weather on buildings, such as flooding or wind damage, as well as secondary effects on buildings caused by infrastructure outages like loss of electricity and water. The Task Force will be fully focused on buildings, both new construction and potential retrofits to existing structures. The Task Force will not take up the important issues of infrastructure or zoning, which are being considered simultaneously by other city groups; as the city’s overall response to Sandy and preparation for other potential risks develops, the Task Force will adapt its process to fit in harmoniously with the larger effort. The Task Force will also include a “rapid rebuilding” component, to fast-track the review of policy proposals affecting buildings currently under consideration by City agencies and the City Council.

My role was to explain the inner workings of the Task Force itself. The main technical efforts will take place in Working Groups, organized by functional area and expertise and co-chaired by designers (architects and engineers). With input from cost, code, and legal experts, the Working Groups will develop proposals based for all types of buildings. These proposals will then be considered  by Committees, organized by building type (Residential, Commercial, and Critical buildings, the latter including hospitals, senior centers, shelters, fire stations, and so forth) and co-chaired by owners. The Committees will consider what parts of the technical proposals should apply to which buildings, with the most stringency likely given to Critical buildings, then Residential, and finally Commercial buildings, with the latter perhaps leaning more towards suggested best practices rather than new requirements. Put simply, Working Groups work in their technical area of expertise to describe what could be done, and Committees work in their building type area to decide by should be done.

There is also a separate Homes Committee, since the issues facing 1-3 family structures are unique. The Task Force will also have At-Large members, with wide-ranging expertise who will consult across all proposals, and a Steering Committee made up of the co-chairs plus representatives from Urban Green Council and New York City government agencies, the Mayor’s Office, and the City Council. The Task Force is blessed with an incredible array of highly experienced experts, including owners, property managers, architects, engineers, contractors, subject matter specialists, and representatives of utilities, city agencies, code consulting, cost estimating and law.

To dive in as deeply and as quickly as possible when meetings begin in the new year, it’s important that all members of the Task Force have a common understanding of what risks the city is facing, now and in the future. We were very lucky to hear remarks from Dr. Cynthia Rosenzweig, Senior Research Scientist at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University. Dr. Rosenzweig was able to compare current risks to those New York City may face in upcoming decades due to climate change. 100-year coastal floods may occur every 15-35 years by 2080, with flood heights increasing by 1-2 feet. Similarly, the risks of heat waves and intense rains will also increase. It was sobering to see the extent of the hazards we may encounter, but knowing the science gives the Task Force a firm base upon which to begin its work.

The Task Force will release a report in summer, 2013. Stay tuned for updates between now and then!

Dear Friends,

The Staff and Board of Directors at Urban Green Council wish you and your families the best during this trying time in the tri-state area. We know many of you have been without power in your homes and offices since the storm hit, and some have suffered far worse.

Among other things, this storm has left us at Urban Green thinking about how personally buildings affect our lives. We have also been considering, from the range of issues we tackle as an organization, what the right emphasis is to place on maintaining the habitability of buildings during a major infrastructure failure. The NYC Green Codes Task Force struggled with this question back in 2008 when it was somewhat in the realm of the hypothetical. The consensus on the Task Force at that time was that it didn’t make sense to impose any major requirements on buildings to improve their resilience.

We recommended fairly limited code changes like requiring toilets and sinks to be able to operate in a blackout, water tanks to be retained in buildings that already had them, and that protective measures be taken for hazardous materials stored in flood zones. One significant exception is that we proposed flood maps be based on projected future flooding that takes into account climate change instead of historical flooding. In an article published in the Gotham Gazette on Monday, advocacy director Cecil Scheib and I discuss the challenge of addressing building resilience through public and private efforts, but it’s an uphill battle.

It’s breathtaking to witness the destructive scenario now unfolding in lower Manhattan. Countless high-rise buildings have been rendered inoperable due to the power outage now in its fourth day. For most of these buildings, especially public housing, this means there has been no water to flush toilets unless it was carried upstairs by hand, no water to wash dishes, and no water for showers. And it’s dark. New buildings are required to include backup generators for elevators and water. In light of Sandy, we (and many others) will be thinking hard about potential new requirements for existing building stock.

Was Sandy climate change in action? The technical answer is that no particular weather event can be ascribed to climate change, but the increased frequency of extreme weather events has been predicted by climate scientists for years. Governor Cuomo nailed the general sentiment with his comment this week: “We have a 100-year flood every two years now.” About the only good thing that can be said about Sandy is that it may prompt more serious discussion about climate change.

This terrible storm is a good reminder of the critical importance of the work of the green building movement and Urban Green Council. We are hoping to minimize the number of storms like Sandy through our efforts to reduce carbon pollution, but we nevertheless need to prepare and adapt for more of them in the future. If you are interested in volunteer opportunities to help in the aftermath of this storm please visit NYC Service.

Please note that our office in lower Manhattan remains closed until power and access is restored but most of the staff remain available via email. Again, we hope this message finds you safe, and we look forward to working with you on the many lessons to be learned from Sandy.

Sincerely,

On September 13, 2012, the NYC Department of Buildings published the final rule detailing compliance with Local Law 87 of 2009, which mandates energy audits and retrocommissioning in buildings over 50,000 square feet. At almost three years in the making (including a hearing and public comment earlier this year), it’s not exactly coming hot on the heels of the original legislation – but it is timely, since the first set of buildings must comply in 2013. If your block number ends in 3 (and here’s to you, Trump Building), hopefully you have already started retrocommissioning, as we recommend that you start the process at least one year before the report is due.

Trump Building at 40 Wall St.

The DOB rule fleshes out the administrative details that the law itself doesn’t include. For instance, it’s a “major” violation to fail to file a report, and carries a penalty of $3,000 for the first year (increasing to $5,000 in subsequent years). Falling behind? Owners can apply for an extension, if they’ve made a good-faith effort to comply and file an extension request by October 1 of the year in which the report is due. And we hope your filing systems are up to snuff – owners have to keep the paperwork on file for 11 years after the due date of the report.

The rule lays out in clear detail how the audits and retrocommissioning must occur. In general, these are “common sense” provisions. For instance, LL87 requires that easily reached sealants and weatherstripping be maintained in good condition, whereas the rule clarifies that asbestos-containing sealants and weatherstripping isn’t required to be removed or replaced. Additionally, the rule does narrow the law’s effect in a few ways:

• LL87 mandated ensuring all equipment is properly functioning, but the rule only requires inspection of larger equipment; for air handlers, “major” units over 5,000 cfm, and for water pumps, units over 10 hp.
• LL87 requires that all sensors be properly calibrated, but for sensors that are not part of a control sequence, the rule allows testing just 10% of them. Further testing is only required if less than 90% of the sensors tested are working properly. Similar provisions apply to light levels and steam trap surveys.
• It clarifies who is allowed to perform retrocommissioning and auditing activities, and what certifications they must maintain.

With the release of the final rule, owners should be poised to begin filing their energy audits and retrocommissioning reports next year (buildings that performed this work prior to the rule, but in accordance with the law, are deemed in compliance). Let’s get those surveys started!

Please note that this blog post is not a complete overview of the requirements and provisions of the energy audit and retrocommissioning law. For that, please see Urban Green Council’s LL87 educational offerings.

Thanks to Marianna Vaidman Stone for her assistance in reviewing the final rule.

“If you have information that is important to the public, you should try to communicate it.”
-Dr. James Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies

A couple weeks ago Urban Green gathered a NASA scientist, leaders of environmental organizations responding to climate change, academics with expertise in understanding how Americans assess risk and deal with this issue, and design professionals trying to communicate their environmentally responsible intents to clients. As one of the organizers of the event, I was anticipating a good conference full of new information and insight.  What I didn’t anticipate was the fluidity of the morning and the fantastic ability of the speakers to play off of one another to draw out new conclusions and leave the audience with a such clear set of principles for talking about climate change.  Actually, make that carbon pollution.

As noted in our live blog posts and other pieces since the conference, it’s clear that climate change and carbon pollution can be challenging topics for discussion. It’s a global problem that requires immediate action and potential sacrifice to produce benefits in a near or distant future, but it’s not widely viewed as a pressing problem.  It’s easy to think someone else will sort it all out for us. Unfortunately, we know this is not the case, but luckily our speakers discussed a host of ways we can hone our message and get through to our colleagues, clients, and others.

If you were unable to attend or you were in the audience and would like a refresher, we’ve provided an overview below. Urban Green Council members can also take a look at the presentations through our secure weblink.

How to talk about climate change in five easy steps:

1. First and foremost, know your audience. All of our communication experts agreed it’s best to have multiple messages for different groups; family, friends, staff, clients, public, etc. Talk to scientists with graphs and charts, speak to clients about health and cost savings, encourage colleagues with business opportunity and productivity improvements, and stir family members to action with personal benefits to children and grandchildren.

2. Scientific facts alone do not convince many people of the dangers (or existence) of climate change. However, talking about climate pollution and associated health risks, for example, make the problem more real and actionable. According to speaker David Ropeik, the brain is four parts subconscious and one part conscious, which means reason is only one-fifth of the decision-making process. He suggests discussing risks that are local and personal instead of global and abstract.

3. Credibility is key so speak from your area of expertise.  Trusted validators from various fields need to deliver the message. All of us in the green building community from developers to construction workers should be speaking out.

4. Counter specific arguments.  This means you must be well-versed in the arguments made by those who support climate action and those who do not.

5. Talk about solutions and quality of life improvements. Don’t just dwell on the problem without proposing solutions. It can be very dismal as compared to opportunities for improvement. Show how changes that mitigate climate change improve health and quality of life and can also improve business. Panelist Dan Probst of Jones Lang LaSalle argued that you can increase financial returns while reducing carbon pollution.

Once you figured out what to say it’s important to remember to do more than talk; act.  As part of the green building community we have the ability to speak out about climate change and the risk of carbon pollution AND take action in the projects we design, develop, and occupy. Let your organization be a driver of change.

That’s all it takes. For those of you who were there, we would love to hear your comments on the day and what you’ll take away from the conference.  Do you have new ideas on how to speak about climate change? Please add your comments below.