Study Demonstrates LEED-ND Rating System Falls Short on Affordable Housing
Research finds fewer than half of LEED ND-certified projects include affordable housing.
The national Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design® for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) fails to encourage developers to include affordable housing in new developments. Nicola Szibbo, PhD, a planner with the City and County of Honolulu, reports her recent findings in the Winter 2016 (Vol. 82, No.1) issue of the Journal of the American Planning Association (JAPA).
In “Lessons for LEED-ND, Social Equity, and Affordable Housing,” Szibbo found that only 40 percent of LEED-ND certified projects include affordable housing. The rating system fails to deliver upon its three-leg sustainability goal of equity, economy, and environment. Since the affordable housing credit is optional, developers can forgo the credit and still achieve a LEED-ND rating. “My research concludes that the affordable housing credit needs to be strengthened or critically reconsidered,” said Szibbo. “The existing optional affordable housing is not currently effective and offers little incentive for developers to include affordable housing.”
LEED-ND is the U.S. Green Building Council’s rating system for neighborhood developments. It is the only rating system that attempts to address issues of sustainability at the neighborhood level. However, affordable housing is worth less than three percent of the overall rating system.The LEED-ND rating is attractive to developers as it increases a development’s marketability and is sometimes viewed as a way to fast track the approval process. Since its inception in 2007, no substantive changes or improvements in the LEED-ND affordable housing credit have been made.
Szibbo’s research included statistical evidence, survey research and structured interviews. She surveyed 114 LEED-ND Accredited Professionals (APs) and conducted 20 personal interviews with developers and other LEED-ND APs. Among her findings:
- Among the 2009 - 2014 LEED-ND projects reviewed, 60 percent chose to ignore the specific affordable housing credit.
- The survey found that 41 percent of respondents believe the existing rating does not support social equity or social sustainability.
- There is opportunity for improving the LEED-ND affordable housing requirement according to 63 percent of the survey respondents.
- Twenty-three percent of survey respondents want more points in the rating system for affordable housing, while 13.5 percent want the affordable housing credit to be mandatory.
- From the interviews with LEED-ND APs, 59 percent believe developers are reluctant to include affordable housing in LEED-ND projects due to potential lower profits or the social stigma of low-income housing affecting marketability.
Szibbo concludes by noting that the LEED-ND process has the potential to deeply affect low-income households by offering housing that is both green and affordable, providing a higher quality of life for residents.
The quarterly Journal of the American Planning Association publishes only double-blind peer-reviewed original research and analysis. The journal has published research, commentaries and book reviews since 1935. In 2003, JAPA was recognized with a bronze award for general excellence from the Society of National Association Publication. JAPA’s 5-year Impact Factor is 2.824.
To read the full article, click here.
About the Journal of the American Planning Association
www.tandfonline.com/RJPA
For more than 70 years, the quarterly Journal of the American Planning Association (JAPA) has published research, commentaries, and book reviews useful to practicing planners, policymakers, scholars, students, and citizens of urban, suburban, and rural areas.
JAPA publishes only peer-reviewed, original research and analysis. It aspires to bring insight to planning the future, to air a variety of perspectives, to publish the highest quality work, and to engage readers.
JAPA is interested in manuscripts that examine historical or contemporary planning experience, broadly defined, in domestic or global contexts, and that do at least one of the following:
- contribute to the theoretical and conceptual foundation of planning;
- improve the link between planning and successful policy implementation;
- advance the methods used in planning practice and planning research;
- explain empirical relationships important to planning;
- interpret noteworthy physical, economic, and social phenomena that have spatial dimensions; or
- analyze significant consequences of planning approaches, processes, and contexts.
Editor: Sandi Rosenbloom, University of Texas, Austin
Print ISSN: 0194-4363 · Online ISSN: 1939-0130 · Volume 82, 2016
For more information, please contact:
Marisa Starr, Journals Marketing Manager
Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Group
530 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 · 215-606-4206
marisa.starr@taylorandfrancis.com
About Routledge, A Member of the Taylor & Francis Group
Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life. As one of the world’s leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, eBooks and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine. From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored, efficient customer service to our library colleagues.
Visit Our Newsroom: newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com · @tandfnewsroom
Tags: