Enterprise Green Communities Criteria

1. Enterprise Green Communities Criteria Trisha Miller Enterprise Community Partners

2. Green Communities Criteria IntegratedDesign Materials Beneficial to the Environment Water Conservation Energy Efficiency Location and Neighborhood Fabric Operations and Maintenance Health

3. Building typologies

4. Construction Types Roanoke & Lee – Blacksburg, VA Westgate Terrace – Rochester, NY Broadway Crossings – Seattle, WA

5. Geographic Locations

6. Enterprise and Green Communities FUNDING • Grants: Charrette and Sustainability Grants to help cover the costs of planning and implementing green operations and maintenance. • Predevelopment, and Acquisition Loans to support the development of affordable rental and homeownership housing that adheres to Green Communities Criteria. • Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) equity for new construction and/or rehabilitation of affordable rental housing that generally adheres to the Green Communities Criteria. • Green Mini Loans:A new lending program from Enterprise and the National Housing Trust Community Development Fund that provides nonprofit owners and developers capital to jump start green retrofits of older affordable rental communities.

7. Report Findings In 2009, Enterprise released report evaluating cost effectiveness of the Green Communities Criteria • Estimated lifetime savings exceed the initial investment of incorporating Green Communities Criteria into affordable housing • Direct savings come from energy and water conservation measures

8. Key Findings • Average cost per unit to meet Energy and Water Criteria = $1,917 • Energy and water efficiency measures paid for themselves as well as produced $2,900 in projected per-unit lifetime savings.

9. Quickest Payback – Water Conservation • Installing water-conserving fixtures and appliances result in a very high returns on investment in terms of utility cost savings. • Average savings of $352 to $935 per home, versus average cost premium of $80 per home. • In simple payback terms, the investment is recouped in 2 to 3 years.

10. Putting Residents First…

11. Slides Courtesy of Tom Phillips, Seattle Housing AuthorityResults - Breath Easy Homes Study Health Improvements

12. What we learned along the way… • Pre-development – • Green is not an add-on • Charrette a must • Construction – • Review plans and specs • Involve agency permit and inspection staff • Verify in the field • Post-construction – • Engage residents • Train property and operations staff • Ensure performance

13. All States Have Adopted Green Programs

14. Green Public Policy • States and Municipalities that have Integrated Green Communities Criteria into policy and programs: • Colorado • Iowa • Maryland • Minnesota • New York State • Washington State • Cleveland, OH • Denver, CO • New York, NY • San Francisco, CA • Washington, DC

15. How to touch every building! Learned: Existing Properties are in Need of Retrofitting Existing Buildings emit 21.6% of total U.S. CO2 emissions It takes 65 years for an energy efficient new building to save the amount lost in demolishing an existing building

16. Current Market Barriers:Retrofit Existing Multi Family Buildings Imperfect Information Multiple Energy Audit Tools No comprehensive Protocol Limited Technical Capacity Inadequate Financing Disaggregated Benefits Split Incentives

17. Our Solution: Enterprise Green Retrofit Program An innovative effort toaccomplish green retrofit projects by improving energy and water efficiency in older affordable multifamily buildings. Current pilot projects: San Francisco, Bay Area Los Angeles Ohio Boston with WINN Development Pacific North West New York AAHSA Enterprise Multi family Mortgage Finance

18. Goals of the Program Offer a standard retrofit process that is replicable and scalable for any market, that: Improves Property Cash Flow Improves Health of Residents Provides Opportunities for Green Jobs Reduces Carbon Emissions

19. What Enterprise Provides Whole- Building Analysis Energy and Water Usage Data Collection Financing Assistance with Assembling Subsidy Sources Verification and Monitoring Training and Education

20. Two Paths to Retrofitting “Add-On” Financing- Property takes on additional debt/or grant funds which is paid back by operational savings of the improvements “Retrofit Mortgage” Refinancing-Mortgage proceeds from the refinance pay for retrofit improvements, and debt is paid back by the energy and water cost savings, over the life of the mortgage

21. Ad-On Loan Terms PROPOSED LOAN TERMS: Target Interest Rate 5% Loan Term 10 years Debt Coverage Ratio 1.15 – 1.25 Collateral unsecured Repayment Source amortized monthly payments Loans repaid with savings achieved as a result of the energy and water efficiency improvements.

22. EXAMPLE:PROJECTED ENERGY SAVINGS & DEBT SERVICE CALCULATIONS* EXAMPLE: San Francisco SRO; 105 units COST OF IMPROVEMENTS: $692,010 ($6,591/unit) ENERGY SAVINGS: $22,243/year DEBT LOAD: $151,964 Projected Energy Savings Over Current Use: 25% *based on draft Green Capital Needs Assessment

23. POTENTIAL FINANCING SCENARIO SF SRO DEBT $ 151,964 Weatherization $ 262,500 (assumes $2.5k/unit) Replacement Reserves $ 52,500 (assumes $500/unit) Utility Rebates/Incentives $ 67,546 (assumes 10% of total cost) CDBG (SF assumption only) $ 157,500 $ 692,010

24. EXAMPLE SF SRO: PROJECT BUDGET SCENARIO

25. Overall Progress Funding- Leveraged $31 million dollars in retrofit financing Approval of 5 loans by year end totaling 775 units Green Capital Needs Assessments- Will complete 155 Energy and Water Conservation Audits and Green Capital Needs Assessments Totaling 1,920 units by year end 2011 Goal- Complete 40 more GCNAs Close on 15-20 additional loans Weatherize and Retrofit approximately 4,000 additional units Create new innovative Refinancing Loan Products

26. Transit Oriented Development • Denver TOD Fund • Metro Denver addition of five new rail lines • Preservation and redevelopment of housing near transit • Sites within 1/2 mile of current or future light rail and a 1/4mile of high frequency, high volume bus corridors • Fund structure • Public-private partnership • $15 million in capital • Purchase and hold sites up to five years

27. TOD Fund Waterfall

28. Denver Model • Three target property types • Existing federally-assisted rental properties • Existing unsubsidized, below-market rate rental properties • Vacant or commercial properties to be converted to new affordable housing • Note that preservation in this case is sometimes rehabbing and sometimes redeveloping while ensuring that affordable units are not lost • Outcomes • Creation and preservation of at least 1,000 units of affordable housing

29. Green Communities Offset Fund

31. BUILDING 1

32. Green Communities Technical Assistance Network • Registry of over 100 TA providers • National searchable database • Online discussion forum • New Tools for Green Affordable Housing • Free Online Certification • Sample Designs and Specifications • Green Asset Management Toolkit www.greencommunitiesonline.org

33. Thank you! For more information: Website: www.greencommunitiesonline.org Mailbox: greencommunities@enterprisecommunity.org