News   Jul 17, 2024
 373     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 854     2 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 650     0 

Market crosses the green line

cdr108

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
4,724
Reaction score
59
Market crosses the green line

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081121.reRetrofit1121/REStory/RealEstate/home

Buyers aren't going to give up their creature comforts

CAROLYN IRELAND
From Friday's Globe and Mail
November 21, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST

A few years ago, developer Peter Goodman spent a small fortune building environmentally-friendly houses on the shores of Georgian Bay. Buyers approved of the green technology, but they weren't willing to pay one added cent for it.

This year, Mr. Goodman gambled that homeowners in the upscale Toronto neighbourhood of Moore Park were ready for a "green" house. The principal of Treehouse Land Developments Inc. paid $1.6-million for a century-old Georgian-style house on a fine, leafy street. He speculatively spent six months expanding, overhauling and installing cutting-edge technology to build a house with a carbon footprint 72 per cent smaller than required by the Ontario building code.

Then he listed it for sale with an asking price of $3.3-million.

"It was a huge bet. It was worth it," says Mr. Goodman, who sold the house on Inglewood Drive a few weeks later. "Three years ago, I blew my brains out and got nice head-nodding. But now people are ready for it."

Mr. Goodman sees a large, untapped opportunity in Canada: He believes homeowners and builders who are renovating existing houses are bypassing the chance to make the country's housing stock progressively more green.

He points to a recent environmental round table which estimated that 66 per cent of the houses that will be standing in 2050 have already been built.

He set himself the task of building a house that is spacious enough and opulent enough to appeal to any of the wealthy bankers or Bay Street executives who favour Moore Park's traditional houses and tree-lined streets in the heart of Toronto.

"I think we have hit the point in marketability where [sustainability] actually matters," he says. "We've crossed over."

Mr. Goodman says many homeowners like the idea of cutting down their energy use but they fear that means taking cold showers, harvesting rainwater, filling their backyards with solar panels and living off the grid.

Not so, says Mr. Goodman, who maintains that buyers do not need to sacrifice size, beauty or luxury.

"You don't want to give up your warm shower," says Mr. Goodman. "The buyer of this is not going to give up their creature comforts," he says.

This all-or-nothing mentality bars homeowners and developers from making any effort at all, he finds. That's a tremendous waste, he figures, because paving over farmland to build new "green" houses doesn't make a lot of sense, in his opinion.

He set out to find out which technologies are worth his investment and which are just too costly, unappealing and difficult to live with. As a builder of custom houses, he also needs to make a profit.

"There's an unbelievable potential list of things you can do," he says. "There's the bleeding edge stuff that doesn't work, the ridiculously expensive stuff … how do you sort it out?"

The recently-completed house on Inglewood Drive has been expanded to 4,300 square feet from the original 1,900. The new space comes from a main-floor family room and kitchen at the rear, a master bedroom suite above, and a finished third floor.

After the renovation, the house has five bedrooms and the shallow basement has been dug out and fully-finished with a media room.

Treehouse is aiming for an award of "silver" from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, program. That means that the house will use about 72 per cent less energy than an equivalent Ontario Building Code house.

To help sift through the bewildering array of technologies, Mr. Goodman brought in John Godden of Alpha-Tec Consulting and Construction. The Toronto-based firm of Spragge & Company Architects provided the design.

Mr. Godden and Mr. Goodman found high-performance windows and built in state-of-the-art insulation and air-tightness.

"We're building this box that's designed to keep heat in the winter and out in the summer," says Mr. Godden.

The kitchen cabinets by Bloomsbury are constructed of wood so that they don't emit formaldehyde the way some other materials do.

Toilets with dual flushers let users decide how much flushing power they need. Grey water from showers and baths is collected, treated, and re-used in the toilets.

Mr. Goodman learned that heating the entire house with solar panels is possible, but he would need eight panels on the lawn. Instead, he discreetly placed two.

"I'm not trying to do this whole house with solar panels — that would take the whole backyard."

Treehouse could have installed a cistern in the backyard to collect rainwater but that would have cost $20,000. Instead, Mr. Goodman spent $3,000 on a drain water heat recovery system that uses a copper pipe to capture the heat from warm water that flows down the drain. That reclaimed energy is used to heat the fresh supply of cold water.

Stone floors are warmed by radiant hot water, while an energy-efficient forced-air system blows heat through rooms with hardwood floors and powers the air conditioning.

Mr. Goodman points out that the house scored extra points on the LEED rating system because it sits on a lot that was previously developed, which also puts it within reach of existing water and sewer lines. The house is close to public transit, parks and community services.

"It didn't disturb the landscape," says Mr. Godden. "It fits in."

A number of developers of new houses are building to LEED standards, says Mr. Goodman, but he likes the idea of retaining the old structure so that tonnes of bricks and wood don't end up in landfill.

The house at 171 Inglewood also uses 73 per cent less natural gas than the Ontario Building Code allows.

Still, the new owners will be able to luxuriate in steam showers and a Recor cast-iron bathtub.

"My end goal is to have someone walk through the house and not know it's a LEED house if they don't go in the basement."

When the bills were tallied, Mr. Goodman estimates he increased his renovation budget by about $60,000 — or 20 per cent — to reduce the carbon footprint nearly 80 per cent.

To him, that's about the right balance. He could have invested in more technology in order to go for a "gold" rating but buyers wouldn't be willing to pay for it.

"At some point the price goes through the roof — we're talking multiples of what I spent."

Mr. Goodman says that rebuilding a century-old house takes a lot more time and effort than building new does. But he saves on disposal costs because he's not tearing the structure down and trucking it away in a dumpster.

"It takes me longer to do this — that's the cost," he says. "The LEED process is not for the faint of heart."

After he sold the house, Mr. Goodman underwent a post-mortem with the buyers to find out which factors made them decide to buy. They loved the location, they loved the expanded lay-out, and the third element was the prospective LEED certification, he says.

Looking ahead, a downturn in the housing market means Mr. Goodman will have to set himself apart from rival builders and he figures that building a greener house is a good way to do it.

"I think we have hit the point in marketability where that actually matters," he says. "We've crossed over."
 
The recently-completed house on Inglewood Drive has been expanded to 4,300 square feet from the original 1,900. The new space comes from a main-floor family room and kitchen at the rear, a master bedroom suite above, and a finished third floor.

I am in favor of environmentally friendly initiatives but how can anyone justify tearing down a 1,900 square foot single family home to build a 4,3000 square foot sfh in the name of conservation? Isn't that ridiculously hypocritical?

Theoretically wouldn't the developer who built the same house at 3,500 square feet with standard materials be conserving more energy and polluting less?

I think the Green Movement has crossed the line into a pure marketing gimmick.
 
I am in favor of environmentally friendly initiatives but how can anyone justify tearing down a 1,900 square foot single family home to build a 4,3000 square foot sfh in the name of conservation? Isn't that ridiculously hypocritical?

Theoretically wouldn't the developer who built the same house at 3,500 square feet with standard materials be conserving more energy and polluting less?

I think the Green Movement has crossed the line into a pure marketing gimmick.


Did you read the article ?!?
He didn't tear down the original building.
As the article noted:

The new space comes from a main-floor family room and kitchen at the rear, a master bedroom suite above, and a finished third floor.

Mr. Goodman says that rebuilding a century-old house takes a lot more time and effort than building new does. But he saves on disposal costs because he's not tearing the structure down and trucking it away in a dumpster.
 
3.3 million to live in Moore Park? Some people have more money than brains. I suspect with the real estate slow down (possible crash) that their house will be worth half what they paid for it in 2 years.
 

Back
Top