►
Description
Public presentation regarding the proposal to implement a sustainability policy for City-funded one to three-unit new construction residential development for projects funded in 2021.
A
Great,
thank
you
welcome
everyone.
My
name
is
kim
havey.
I
am
director
of
the
city
of
minneapolis
sustainability
division
and
I'm
here
with
colleagues
from
our
council
offices,
as
well
as
our
community
planning
and
economic
development
department,
our
consultants
from
mtep,
as
well
as
the
center
for
energy
and
the
environment.
A
The
presentation
today
is
being
recorded
and
will
be
posted
publicly,
including
questions
received.
Attendees
can
submit
comments
and
questions
at
any
time
through
the
chat
feature.
So
if
you
hover
your
mouse
over
the
about
the
center
of
the
screen,
you'll
see
that
just
to
the
right
of
the
three
dots
is
a
little
conversation
box
in
there.
You
can
click
on
that
and
type
in
your
questions
or
comments
off
to
the
right.
A
You
can
then
push
star
six
and
that
will
turn
on
your
mic
for
a
question.
You're
also
welcome
to
send
questions
to
minneapolis
homes
at
minneapolismn.gov
and
that's
also
in
the
chat
box,
but
it's
mpls
h-o-m-e-s
at
minneapolismn.gov
and
those
will
be
responded
to
by
staff.
So
we
greatly
appreciate
your
participation
and
your
interest
in
learning
about
our
new
sustainability
policy.
A
So
today
we're
going
to
be
reviewing
a
new
sustainability
policy
for
one
to
three
unit
homes
that
participate
in
the
minneapolis
homes
program,
you'll,
hear
from
presenters
from
the
city
of
minneapolis
intep
te
studios,
the
architectural
and
engineering
firm
who
work
with
us
to
complete
a
comparison
of
passive
house
and
zero
energy,
ready
housing
constraints,
conditions
and
costs.
We'll
also
hear
from
the
center
for
energy
in
the
environment
on
how
to
comply
with
and
understand
this
particular
sustainability
policy
requirements.
A
But
first
I
want
to
turn
things
over
to
council
member
kevin
reich
from
ward
one
council.
Member
reich
has
been
a
champion
of
affordable
and
sustainable
housing
and
has
really
helped
us
be
able
to
pursue
a
more
progressive
work
on
our
housing
policies
in
order
to
reduce
our
energy
use
and
to
provide
opportunities
to
reduce
energy
costs
and
energy
burden.
Especially
in
these
affordable
homes
that
are
being
constructed
to
the
minneapolis
homes
program,
so
with
that
I'd
like
to
turn
it
over
to
councilmember
wright
for
an
introduction.
C
As
folks
know,
we
have
a
very
ambitious
set
of
goals
in
terms
of
reducing
carbon
commission
emissions
by
80
percent
by
2050..
The
question
is:
how
do
we
get
there,
and
so
much
of
our
policies
are
trying
to
create
parameters
that
launch
how
we
will
move
forward
to
achieve
those
goals.
The
2040
plan
says
that
we're
going
to
be
a
growing
city,
but
we
want
to
just
have
growth
per
se.
C
We
want
to
make
sure
that
growth
is
equitable,
resilient,
accommodates
people
from
where
they're
at
and
where
we
need
to
go
as
policy
makers
as
a
city.
That's
trying
to
meet
its
objectives,
the
built
environment
plays
a
role
in
that
and,
of
course,
today's
conversation
is
a
component
of
the
overall
portfolio
of
where
we
live
and
how
we
live,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
clean,
efficient
and
safe
environments
for
everyone.
And,
of
course,
when
we
say
everyone,
we
have
to
be
mindful
of
income
barriers.
C
We
have
to
be
mindful
of
location
and,
of
course,
to
these
conversations
to
be
mindful
of
the
actual
performance
of
these
structures
moving
forward.
Otherwise
we
will
not
meet
the
goals,
if
we're
not
intentional.
So
I'm
very
happy
that
we're
having
this
conversation
to
to
move
in
that
direction
intentionally
with
the
broader
community.
A
A
A
A
The
study
showed
that
the
upfront
costs
are
relatively
the
same
for
a
minneapolis-built
home,
either
using
mixed
fuel
or
using
all
electric,
but
that
the
average
annual
cost
over
15
years
is
nine
percent
lower
for
an
all
electric
home.
So,
in
order
for
us
to
be
able
to
move
in
this
direction,
reduce
costs
be
more
resilient.
A
D
Oh
wonderful,
thank
you.
Thanks
for
the
introduction
and
thanks
to
all
the
stakeholders,
if
you
could
advance
the
slide,
thank
you
there.
We
are
so
we're
intes
and
key
studio.
We
were
the
architects
of
record
for
the
first
certified
past
policy
in
the
country
that
we've
been
dealing
with
these
subject
matters
here.
D
For
the
last
15
plus
years,
we
initiated
a
conversation
about
ultra
efficiency,
passive
hauls
and
pilot
projects
as
early
as
2008
with
the
city
of
minneapolis,
and
we're
really
excited
in
2019
to
be
hired
to
conduct
this
study
that
we're
talking
about
here
today.
In
our
study,
we
are
comparing
cold,
green
communities,
zero
energy
ready
home
and
the
paso
cost
building
energy
standard,
and
I'm
going
to
bring
you
some
of
the
work
that
we
did
in
the
findings
here
today.
All
of
it
can
be
expanded
upon.
D
D
Please
all
right,
I
I
can't
see
that
right
now,
I'm
just
going
to
assume
that
that
is
the
slide.
That
is
up
so
our
first
question
that
we're
asking
to
embed
this
study
is:
why
do
we
need
ultra
efficient
buildings
and
I
think,
ultimately,
as
a
society,
we
need
to
decide
on
which
track
we
want
to
go
to
do
cost
effective
carbon
emission
reductions
and
sequestration.
D
We
need
to,
as
kim
alluded
to
earlier,
leave
fossil
fuels
behind
by
about
the
middle
of
the
century
and
shift
our
grid
from
natural
gas,
oil,
gas
and
diesel
to
only
renewable
energy
sources.
The
most
universal
fuel
at
this
moment
in
time
is
electricity.
This
is
where
the
notion
of
an
all-electric
home
comes
into
play
in
minnesota.
We
have
a
significant
heating
load
that
is
typically
supplied
with
natural
gas
without
natural
gas,
it's
extremely
difficult
to
supply
heating,
with
only
electricity
without
any
kind
of
load,
shifting,
ideally
seasonally.
D
That
has
something
to
do
with
the
fact
that
we're
creating
renewable
electricity,
not
necessarily
at
the
time
that
is
being
demanded
or
needs
to
be
available
for
use.
So
we
need
to
look
at.
How
can
we
store
energy
to
replace
natural
gas
with
electricity?
The
grid
needs
to
grow
about
three
fold
in
output
annually,
but
even
more
so
to
supply
peak
load
at
the
time
of
need.
That
is
a
huge
ask
of
our
grid
and
that
doesn't
even
include
using
electric
cars,
so
that
is
a
tall
order
and
certainly
something
that
informed.
D
C
D
End
I
apologize
so.
The
next
slide
should
talk
about
differences
here.
So
as
intep
we
investigated
code,
green
communities,
building,
standard,
zero,
energy,
ready
home
and
passa
calls
in
a
local
case
study,
and
we
had
partnership
with
a
gimmick,
a
local,
affordable,
housing
developer
and,
by
extension,
their
contractors
to
help
with
some
of
the
pricing
next
slide.
Please,
in
comparison,
we
find
that
they
are
very
different
standards.
Not
all
these
standards
are
performance
based
so
really
what
we
have
before
as
an
apples
to
oranges
comparison.
D
However,
these
standards,
if
we
look
at
them,
they
can
be
quite
complimentary
and
that's
something
we
want
to
talk
about
today.
Next
slide,
please
green
communities
and
zero
energy
ready
home
are,
by
extension,
energy
star
buildings.
The
table,
that's
in
front
of
you,
it's
small
print
again.
If
somebody
wants
to
go
deep,
we
can
dive
into
that
in
the
questions
or
at
a
different
venue.
But
the
point
here
is
we
put
side
by
side
these
four
different
models,
comparing
building
envelope
mechanical
systems
and,
by
extension,
the
performance.
D
C
D
D
E
D
That
in
the
status
quo,
we
have
another
great
building
envelope
with
a
big
mechanical
system
in
an
incremental
improvement.
We
make
that
a
little
better
and
we
augment
that
with
renewable
energy,
but
that
something
like
the
fascicle
standard
really
presents
a
leapfrog
approach
on
that.
That
is,
more
systems
based
and
looks
at
what
happens
under
the
hood
of
the
building
itself.
D
D
D
D
That
is
one
of
the
bigger
hurdles
to
tackle,
and
that
is
the
biggest
difference
between
these
standards,
in
that
they
don't
all
address
it.
In
the
same
way,
I
already
mentioned
green
communities
with
zero
energy
ready
home
are
essentially
energy
star.
So
when
you
see
that
in
these
tables
use
that
interchangeably
and
they
provide
modest
improvements
over
code.
C
D
D
However,
we
also
found
that
not
all
green
communities
or
energy
star
buildings
are
currently
built
specifically
to
that
standard,
and
so
the
reality
is
that
those
performances
on
the
heating
and
cooling
side
are
generally
only
about
10.
Maybe
15
percent
keep
going
on
the
slides,
please
so
right
here
we
stop
for
a
second
that's
great
net.
Zero,
typically
achieved
by
offset
on
its
own
roof
is
something
that
doesn't
readily
work.
D
You
can
see
that
if
you
look
at
the
second
row
from
bottom
on
green
communities
or
zero
energy
ready
homes,
the
reason
why
that's
great
out
here
is
because
the
model
we
were
given
didn't
meet
all
those
criteria,
but
we
did
include
it
and
the
seasonal
peak
load
on
a
energy
star
building
is
still
fairly
large.
There
is
still
a
significant
heating
load
to
be
conquered,
and
with
that
comes
a
load
shift
requirements.
D
The
comfort
is
a
little
bit
up
from
the
code
building,
but
not
in
a
huge
way.
There's
some
resilience
added
to
the
building,
in
that
it
has
a
slightly
better
building
envelope,
but
in
some
it
cannot
be
fueled
on
its
own
roof
and
it
cannot
be
fueled
with
today's
clean
energy
grid
capacity.
So
those
are
some
of
the
things
that
stood
out
to
us
in
the
green
community:
slash
energy
star
realm,
maybe
a
couple
of
additional
nodes
here
on
that
program.
D
Typically,
those
buildings
are
quantified
using
something
called
the
herz
rating
home
energy
rating
system
and
that
generates
a
performance
number
that
is
not
a
straight
up:
building
science
number,
but
essentially
just
a
number
between
zero
and
100
to
sort
of
rank,
the
building
versus
normal
buildings
and
there's
some
confusion
with
that.
As
that
model
struggles
to
capture
really
high
performing
buildings
anecdotally,
and
also
since
it's
not
transparent,
it
doesn't
really
enable
to
compare
these
systems
very
well
amongst
each
other.
So
we
have
to
take
the
those
numbers
with
a
grain
of
salt.
D
That's
why
we
energy
model
buildings
and
that's
those
are
the
outcomes
that
you
can
see
here.
So
when
we're
talking
about
site
energy,
for
instance,
you
know
in
a
green
community
setting
thirty
four
thousand
kilowatt
hours
annually,
zero
energy
ready
home
may
be
as
good
as
sixteen
thousand
and
then
the
passwords
we
can
get
down
to
actually
a
plus
more
generated
than
consumed
in
any
given
year
when
partnered
with
the
offset
on
the
roof.
D
The
reason
why
I
bring
up
this
difference
about
how
these
systems
are
quantified
or
how
these
building
programs
are
quantified
is
that
it
would
be
difficult
for
any
engineer
to
design
a
future
grid
and
good
buildings
based
on
a
score
without
the
actual
load.
So
we
also
need
to
look
at
which
of
these
programs
can
provide
us
with
actual
loads
real
loads
based
on
building
science.
D
That
can
help
inform
that,
and
so
that
was
something
that
stood
out
to
us
here
with
the
passover
standard,
as
it
does
that
I'm
not
quite
ready
for
the
financial
analysis.
I
need
another
minute,
please
so,
on
the
pathophile
side,
most
importantly,
we
cut
about
90
percent
of
the
heating,
slash
cooling
energy
at
about
60
to
80
percent
on
overall
energy
consumption
over
code,
and
the
passive
house
is
effectively
because
of
its
high
performance
building
envelope
a
thermal
battery.
D
It
is
a
storage
device
which
is
something
that
we
struggle
to
make
for
electricity
in
an
efficient
and
cost
efficient
way.
The
seasonal
peak
load
is
small
load.
Shifting
requirements
are
still
there,
but
much
much
smaller
net
zero
becomes
possible
on
the
building.
We
have
more
comfort,
more
resilience
and
we
can
fuel
with
today's
grid.
I
mentioned
that
and
I
would
go
so
far.
This
goes
back
to
the
partnership
that
the
path
to
a
net
zero
building
goes
through
passive
house.
D
The
standard
by
the
way
is
30
years
old
has
been
used
all
over
the
world
and
so
in
those
places
where
it's
been
adopted
generally
for
that
pedigree,
so
one
other
side
note
locally.
Green
standards
are
not
always
built
to
specification.
I
think
that
it
affects
all
programs,
so
one
important
piece,
whether
we
learned
in
our
study
and
we
brought
to
the
city
is,
we
cannot
be
guaranteed
compliance
without
audit.
D
We
recommend
buildings
get
certified
whenever
possible
to
ensure
that
they
deliver
the
quality
they
were
set
out
to
deliver,
and,
secondly,
the
market
needs
incentive.
Six
carats
leadership
to
develop
the
local
talent
and
capacity
we're
a
little
short
on
that
right
now,
and
that
is
something
where
especially
projects
that
use
public
money
can
demonstrate
that
leadership.
D
D
I'm
not
seeing
that
at
the
moment,
so
I'll
jump
ahead.
Still
first
thing
to
note
on
the
financial
analysis
is
when
we
look
at
the
past
assault
program.
Really
additional
money
spent
on
making
a
passive
house
is
not
so
much
a
cost
as
an
investment
similar
to
a
solar
panel.
We
are
investing
into
the
shell
of
a
building
which
then
becomes
a
thermal
storage
battery
and
therefore
pace
back
over
its
life,
and
it
does
that
indefinitely
and
without
moving
parts
next
slide.
D
Please
should
show
that
content
so
as
compared
to
the
status
quo
and
incremental
upgrades
the
passwords
program
costs
very
differently,
because
it
is
an
investment
into
the
future
by
virtue
of
the
fact
that
we
can
turn
off
fossil
fuels
and
replace
with
clean
electricity
that
solves
the
carbon
issue
to
a
large
extent
and
is
ultimately
over
its
life,
like
most
cost
effective
approach
that
we
considered
in
our
study.
Thank
you.
I
can
now
see
the
slide
on
the
first
day
cost.
We
should
talk
about
that
for
just
a
second.
D
The
market
pricing
that
we
returned
that
was
returned
to
us
showed
up
333
000
for
an
average
stream
communities,
building
395
for
an
average
capital
house.
This
is
with
the
market
not
having
done
past
the
falls
we're
looking
at
pilot
project
costs.
Please
also
note
the
idiosyncrasies
that
the
most
expensive
green
communities
house
was
more
expensive
than
the
cheapest
passing
house.
So
the
takeaway
here
are
in
a
worst-case
scenario:
there's
a
60
to
65
thousand
dollar
investment
for
pastor
falls
needed.
D
D
Unfortunately,
I
have
this
delay,
so
I
don't
know
what
you're
seeing
just
yet.
For
me,
the
next
slide
here
is
one
that
compares
the
net
zero
investment
across
the
different
passive
house
outside
the
different
pilot
projects.
What
we
found
in
our
study
was
that
taking
any
project
code
energy
star
so
by
extension,
zero
energy
ready
there,
it
is
or
green
communities
or
pass
the
calls
to
an
annual
net
zero
cost
about
the
same.
For
all
intents
and
purposes,
the
money
between
those
the
differences
are
very,
very
small.
D
You
can
advance
to
the
next
slide,
but
the
benefits
that
are
generated
in
the
in
these
scenarios
are
very,
very
different.
There's
differences
in
resilience
and
comfort
in
carbon
footprint
and,
most
importantly,
in
the
grid
superstructure
if
we
want
infrastructure
to
supply
them.
So
there
is
a
danger
here
in
how
we
set
up
this
study
and
how
we
looked
at
this,
because
there
was
a
big
focus
on
first
day
cost
and
the
the
danger
that
we're
facing
is
that
the
first
day
cost
comparison
does
not
tell
the
whole
story
in
a
way.
D
It
is
almost
a
wrong
question
to
ask,
as
it
doesn't
capture
you
know
what
happens
down
the
road
and
with
that
we
can
advance
to
the
next
slide.
So
you
can
see
here
these
total
upgrade
costs
at
the
bottom
anywhere
from
95
to
101,
so
for
all
essential
purposes.
The
same,
let's
advance
the
next
slide,
where
we
get
into
the
discussion
around
the
social
cost.
D
D
D
It
should
come
through
that
there's
a
carbon
cost
to
be
assessed
to
these
buildings,
and
that
is
vastly
different
between
the
different
models
and
then
the
average
load
needed
in
our
grid
to
supply
these
buildings
is
vastly
different,
so
there
will
be
a
cost
of
those
changes
to
the
grid
infrastructure
to
supply
them,
and
then
we
still
have
a
winter
peak
load
issue
on
top
of
it.
That
is
very
different
between
them.
D
So
in
some
you
know
if
the
baseline
and
status
quo
today
means
we
have
very
high
peak
load
and
seasonal
load
shift
and
a
very
high
sequestration
need
and
and
very
low
resilience
than
in
a
pathophiles
realm.
You
know
all
these
things
are
turned
around
where
the
peak
load
issue
goes
away,
sequestration
need
is
lessened
and
our
energy
resilience
goes
up
at
a
cheaper
cost
over
time.
Next
slide,
please.
D
So
a
leapfrog
approach
can
put
us
on
track
to
feasible
and
sustainable
future
without
a
huge
burden,
and
that's
demonstrated
currently
with
leadership
in
the
eu,
canada
and
also
quite
a
few
cities
and
states
in
the
us
and
canada,
and
I
would
also
like
to
note-
and
we
looked
at
that
a
little
bit-
it
is
a
huge
opportunity
to
boost
our
local
construction
industry.
Construction
generally
is
very
local,
so
the
money
spent
there
stays
here
versus
buying
solar
panels
or
equipment
which
quite
often
comes
from
elsewhere.
D
So
then
the
money
goes
abroad,
and
so
there's
a
huge
opportunity
here
for
a
high
performance
program
to
capture
that.
So
as
a
society,
we
need
to
decide
whether
to
invest
in
energy
generation,
which
has
peak
and
seasonal
low
shift
issues
and
means
growing
the
grid
by
an
order
of
magnitude
or
invest
in
energy
efficiency,
to
eliminate
the
need
for
heating
energy.
D
The
future
depends
on
having
a
clear
path
so
that
investments
in
the
grid
can
be
targeted
and
adequate.
A
sustainable
energy
system
requires
an
integrated
system
approach
based
on
a
clear
energy
demand
plan,
and
that's
what
we're
setting
here
with
policy
right,
we're
setting
the
trajectory
for
what
is
left.
What
do
we
have
to
generate
after
we
make
these
buildings
to
one
standard
or
another?
D
I'd
also
like
to
point
out
that
owner's
occupants
are
generally
the
biggest
fan
of
factors
of
making
really
really
good
buildings,
but
ultimately
our
society
will
benefit
from
them.
Obviously,
and
so
we
need
to
decide
here
and
now,
if
we're
writing
policy,
whether
we
leave
any
energy
or
financial
debt
or
burden
behind
for
our
children
or
grandchildren.
To
pick
up
that's
what
this
last
slide
here
is
meant
to
to
showcase
and
before
I
party
I
think
I
have
one
more
minute
I'd
like
to
leave
you
with
some
thoughts.
D
We
would
like
to
see
a
city
where
we
remove
barriers
for
those
who
want
to
go
far
and
make
really
really
good
buildings.
We
would
like
to
see
incentives
for
those
who
want
to
do
the
right
thing
and
disincentives
for
those
who
don't
we'd
like
to
see
leadership,
especially
in
projects
where
public
money
is
invested.
D
And
we
also
would
like
to
see
support
to
bring
up
the
general
building
code
to
get
in
line
with
our
reality
and
building
science,
where
the
current
system
really
just
favors
incremental
improvements.
And
it
will
take
us
an
absolute
age
to
see
any
kind
of
leapfrog
change
in
the
building
industry.
With.
C
D
I
thank
you
for
your
time
and
the
opportunity
to
conduct
this
study.
I'm
happy
to
stand
by
for
questions.
All
our
information
will
be
made
available.
Thank
you.
So
much
and
special
thanks
to
councilmember
wright
who's
been
a
sounding
board,
a
partner
and
inspiration
all
through
the
process,
and
we
hope
that
we
delivered
a
plethora
of
information
to
inform
the
city's
policy
making.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you
tim,
and
we
appreciate
you
bearing
with
us
with
some
of
our
technical
difficulties
as
well
and
apologize
to
you
as
the
audience,
as
well
as
some
of
our
presenters
weren't
able
to
join
through
the
typical
fashion
and
that's
causing
them
to
call,
and
it
seems
like
causing
a
slight
delay
in
what
they're.
Seeing
on
the
screen
before
I
jump
into
the
cities
recommendations
for
its
sustainability
policy,
I
wanted
to
talk
about
the
program
that
that
policy
will
impact,
and
that
is
the
minneapolis
homes
program.
F
So
minneapolis
homes
is
a
group
of
city
programs
that
provide
home
buyer
services,
such
as
down
payment
assistance,
as
well
as
access
to
homebuyer
education,
homebuyer,
counseling
and
financial
wellness
training.
The
program
includes
an
annual
application
process
where
developers
and
individuals
can
apply
to
purchase
city-owned
land
in
vacant
structures
and
request
gap,
financing
for
their
development
projects
within
the
city
of
minneapolis.
F
F
As
a
result
of
the
study
and
the
information
gained
we
are,
is
the
city
are
proposing
to
implement
a
sustainability
policy
for
our
new
construction
projects
funded
through
the
minneapolis
homes
financing
program?
The
current
proposal
would
impact
one
to
three
unit
new
construction
developments
by
increasing
the
minimum
criteria
from
the
green
communities
criteria
that
tim
mentioned
to
the
department
of
energy,
zero
energy
ready
homes
program.
F
F
F
F
homes
built
under
the
program
are
13
more
efficient
than
existing
homes
built
to
the
green
community
standard
within
our
program
and
approximately
40
percent
more
efficient
than
a
typical
new
construction
home.
The
program
is
a
step
above
green
communities,
but
is
also
easily
achievable,
as
it
does
not
require
a
significant
modification
to
the
home
design.
F
Some
of
our
development
partners
are
already
building
to
the
standard,
as
I
already
mentioned,
in
homes
that
are
zero
energy,
ready,
produce,
significant
energy
cost
savings
over
the
life
of
the
home
that
makes
them
more
affordable
for
the
occupants
that
live
within
them.
The
policy
change
would
impact
homes
funded
through
the
minneapolis
homes
program,
which
typically
funds
30
to
60
new
construction
units
in
any
given
year.
F
F
Based
upon
the
passive
study
completed
by
intep,
the
amount
to
upgrade
a
home
to
passive
net
zero
costs,
approximately
65
000,
and
then
there
are
some
additional
costs
of
the
energy
rating
and
certification
plus
architectural
design
work.
That
can
add
some
more
cost
to
that.
The
passive
study
also
demonstrated
that
passive,
home
and
net
zero
home
design
requirements
are
not
universally
known
amongst
the
general
contracting
community.
F
One
goal
of
this
incentive
is
to
increase
the
amount
of
homes
built
to
either
standard,
so
that
more
general
contractors
and
developers
become
aware
of
the
building
methods,
because
most
general
contractors
don't
currently
build
ultra
efficient
homes.
The
cost
of
building
tends
to
be
higher
as
more
homes
are
built
and
familiarity
increases.
Those
costs
should
continue
to
go
down
steep.
Our
c-pet
staff
will
be
reviewing
homes
built
under
the
incentive
and
new
possible
requirements
no
less
than
every
five
years.
F
The
goal
is
to
eventually
have
all
homes
built
through
the
program
be
either
passive
or
net.
Zero
developers
can
and
should
work
with
an
energy
rater
to
ensure
compliance
with
sustainability
policies.
Multiple
organizations
provide
services,
some
of
which
have
partnered
with
development
partners
through
cped
programs
and
some
of
those
organizations.
They've
worked
with
include
building
knowledge,
intel
tv
studio,
which
just
spoke
previously
precipitate
architecture
and
center
for
energy
in
the
environment,
who
I
will
now
be
turning
the
presentation
over
to
speak
to
compliance
with
sustainability
policy.
F
E
Okay,
yes,
I'm
phil
anderson's
community,
our
center
for
energy
environments,
I'm
going
to
go
a
little
brief
overview
of
the
resident
hers,
ratings,
energy,
star
and
george
ready,
just
kind
of
walk
through
some
of
the
policy
changes.
Kevin
just
talked
about
so
yeah.
We
do
hers
ratings
and
energy
star
ratings
and
georgia
ready
ratings
with
some
of
the
developers
already
working
in
minneapolis.
So,
let's
kind
of
speak
to
the
changes
there.
If
you
can
go
to
the
next
slide,.
E
E
Just
checking
air
leaks
stuff,
like
that
before
the
house
is
enslaved
and
covered
up
and
we're
doing
a
pre-installation
or
installation,
inspection
or
pre-drywall
inspection,
so
we're
checking
for
any
other
anomalies,
missed
opportunities.
Stuff
like
that
to
make
sure
house
gets
to
see
what's
up
rate,
the
insulation
see
how
how
the
insulation
looks
before
it's
covered
up
and
then
final
testing
that
her's
rating
they're
doing
a
border,
duct
testing
and
then
documenting
all
the
appliances
and
putting
that
into
a
herz
index.
E
That
system
is
usually
modeled
through
a
software.
It's
either
rem
rates
or
ecotropic.
Two
common
ones
here
in
minnesota
and
that
chart
on
the
right
is
the
different
hers
index
there
and
I'll
kind
of
get
that
next
slide,
we'll
kind
of
cover
more
of
what
that
is.
But
the
zero
is
a
homemade,
zero
energy
and
hers.
100
is
a
reference
home
built
like
2004
standards,.
E
E
E
So
it's
encouraging
better
windows
package
there.
There
are
some
minimums
there,
but
you
definitely
go
way
beyond
that
as
well,
and
then
you're
meeting
the
iecc
2015
code
levels
for
insulation,
so
minnesota
we're
loosely
following
the
2012
iecc
currently,
so
this
kind
of
jumps
it
up
quite
a
bit
for
that,
so
something
you
definitely
want
to.
You
know
check
on
make
sure
you're
hitting
those
levels
as
well.
So
that's
the
whole
shell
of
the
envelope
of
the
building.
Those
levels
are
going
up.
E
Home
and
the
other
things
on
the
new
engine
ready
is
the
hot
water
distribution,
so
you're
designing
that
system
to
provide
rapid
hot
water
to
the
homeowner
so
you're,
you
know
this
could
be
stacked.
Plumbing
could
be
just
just
a
little
more
thought
needs
to
be
put
in,
and
typically
the
home
sizes
we're
seeing
for
these
houses
that
are
built
through
these
programs.
Are
it's
easy
to
achieve
just
by
good
plumbing
design
and
distribution?
E
But
it's
definitely
requires
some
thought
up
front
and
you
can't
just
have
your
plumber
come
in
and
just
throwing
their
normal
baby
plumbing
system
they
need
to
just
you
know,
think
about
the
size
of
all
those
systems.
We're
measuring
the
water,
hot
water
delivery
temperature
at
the
furthest
fixture
in
the
house
to
ensure
it
meets
that
this
can
also
be
achieved
through
a
pump.
E
They
have
different,
automated
or
sensor
pumps
that
you
can
set
up
to
meet
this
goal
as
well,
and
then
the
other
big
kind
of
change
here
for
zero
injury,
ready
homes
is
the
indoor
air
quality
certifications
through
the
indoor
plus
epa
program.
So
a
lot
of
this
consists
of
things
are
already
in
the
code,
but
it's
essentially
just
really
trying
to
protect
that
inside
air
environment
of
the
home,
so
the
products
low
vocs
on
the
paints
and
glues
and
wood
products.
Everything
that's
going
in
the
house.
E
That's
kind
of
the
biggest
change
is
mostly
the
products
you're
putting
in.
So
it's
really
a
matter
of
looking
over
this
list,
working
with
your
lumber
yards,
your
distributors,
to
make
sure
you're
putting
in
these
products
that
aren't
off-gassing
horribly,
because
the
whole
point
of
these
homes
now
is
to
fill
them
tighter
and
then
ventilate
them.
You
know
very
well
as
also
so
that's
something
to
be
aware
of.
We
have
to
follow
that
program
too,
and
then
making
a
home
pv
ready
if
the
climate
has
significant
solar
insulation.
E
So
you
know
a
lot
of
times
it's
based
on
a
lot
based
on
whatever's
there.
You
need
to
make
it
at
least
tv
ready
for
the
program.
So
it's
not
really
there's
no
mandatory
requirement
for
pv,
but
you
know
it's
certainly
encouraged,
but
you
know
just
making
it
pv
ready
is
not
that
hard
to
do
at
that
time
of
construction,
because
I'm
just
giving
away
the
trend
of
solar
energy,
you
know
being
a
lot
more
cost
effective
these
days.
E
E
And
this
next
slide,
I'm
going
to
talk
about
here
is
kind
of
the
chart.
Kevin
showed
earlier
we're
talking
about
the
minnesota
on
the
left.
Here
we
have
the
2012
iecc
as
loosely
based
on
minnesota
code.
Here
we
have
some
walls
a
little
different,
some
foundation
walls
a
little
different.
We
already
acquired
balanced
ventilation
here
in
minnesota.
You
jump
up
to
energy
star.
You
have
a
little
lower
her
score,
but
then
they
also
have
mandatory
requirements
for
the
icc,
2009
as
a
backdrop
for
all
features
of
that
home.
E
That's
icc
12
for
a
lot
of
the
goals
you're
comparing
against.
On
that.
I
have
independent
verification,
water
management
and
then
hvac
quality
installation
with
whole
house.
Ventilation
is
required
for
both
energy
star
and
zero
energy
ready.
So
I'm
going
to
get
getting
that
hers,
zero
energy,
ready
that
her
score
is
going
to
go
down.
I
get
again
that
2015
icc
enclosure,
so
the
you
know,
installation
package
on
the
home
is
gonna,
be
a
lot
better.
E
E
E
So
the
hurst
radar
is
a
key
thing
to
all
these
different
programs.
Here,
just
engaging
with
someone
early
on
to
you
know
in
this
design
process,
when
you're
going
to
build
a
home,
it's
going
to
get
someone
on
board
early
on
to
go
through
the
different
programs,
walk
through
all
the
different
parameters.
You
have
to
hit
different
trainings
and
you
know
what
you
have
to
sign
up
for
and
then
do
a
projected
rating
to
find
out
if
that
home,
achieves
the
performance
that's
required
by
these
different
programs.
So
there
are
certain
hers
target
scores.
E
You
have
to
hit
there's
different
requirements.
You
have
to
hit
on
different
systems
you
put
in
the
house
and
testing
thresholds.
You
need
to
achieve
as
well.
So
you
know
verifying
verify
that
er
on
early
on
is
very
important
there
and
then
finding
out
what
trade-offs
can
be
made.
So
are
there
different?
You
know
it's
an
easy
out.
E
You
could
maybe
insulate
more
on
the
walls,
exterior
walls
and
then
maybe
didn't
need
as
much
in
that
basement
wall
assembly
or
the
slabs,
so
just
kind
of
some
trade-offs
there,
depending
on
what
your
budget
is
and
then
going
through
those
requirements
to
specs
and
the
expectations
with
the
subs.
So
really
it's
key
to
make
these
projects
successful
is
to
get
on.
You
know,
have
a
detailed
spec
sheet
with
these,
with
your
subs
go
over
that
with
them
and
kind
of
make
their.
E
You
know,
contracts
required
on
them
being
able
to
achieve
these
goals
for
these
different
programs
as
they're.
This
is
not
just
a
average
code
built
home
and
you
know
we
definitely
struggle
with
some
contractors
and
insulators
and
hvac
technicians
out
there
that
you
know
don't
really
understand
the
differences
here,
but
it's
really
good
to
talk
about
these
up
front
so
websites
there.
You
can
locate
hers
raiders
these
different
programs.
E
And
finally,
I'm
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
incentives
that
are
available
so
centerpoint
energy
and
excel
both
have
they're
paying
for
hers
rating
based
on
the
efficiency
of
that
home.
So
they
have
a
program
with
a
baseline
home
minnesota
home
design.
So
when
you
do
a
herz
rating,
you
can
compare
those
savings
on
that
baseline
home
versus
the
home.
You
actually
built
so
through
that
hers
rating
the
data
collection
and
the
testing
and
of
the
ventilation
and
the
door
door
and
other
testing
we're
doing
at
that
house.
E
They
can,
you
know,
find
that
hurry
score
and
then
calculate
what
kind
of
percent
savings
better
than
that
baseline
home
was
achieved,
so
the
herz
rate
would
be
the
one
that
submits
this
to
the
utility
and
then
here
below
at
the
bottom.
Here
is
a
chart
from
the
center
point
energy's
incentive
so
anywhere
from
500
up
to
four
thousand
dollars.
If
you're
going
to
the
zero
hundred
home
I'd
say
our
typical
builders
of
those
would
probably
be
coming
in
the
35
30
to
35
percent,
so
over
two
thousand
dollars
per
home.
E
So
you
know.
Ideally,
this
is
going
to
cover
at
least
your
hers,
raider
cost
and
some
additional.
You
know.
Energy
improvement
costs
there
and
you
know,
we've
definitely
had
some
builders
go
all
the
way
to
meet
the
maximum
level
as
well,
so
we'll
say:
excel
energy
has
another
program
as
well
for
this
for
all
electric
homes
and
then
center
point
also
has
one
for
non-profit
housing
developers.
So
if
you're
our
developer
was,
it
was
part
of
a
non-profit
organization,
there's
even
further
incentives
for
that,
and
that's
all
I
had
for
my
portion.
E
F
And
at
this
point
we
are
taking
comments
and
questions
and
then
from
there
the
staff
will
then
go
to
the
city
of
minneapolis
city,
council,
business
inspections,
housing
and
zoning
committee
on
tuesday
november
17th.
So
that's
the
date
where
city
staff
will
make
the
recommendations
that
you're
hearing
about
today,
the
city
council
and
then,
if
approved,
the
policy,
would
then
be
implemented
for
the
upcoming
funding
application
that
is
anticipated
to
come
in
late
2020
and
then
projects
that
are
funded
in
2021
would
implement
the
zero
energy
ready
standard
for
one
to
three
unit.
F
F
And
then
I
want
to
thank
intel
for
the
work
in
drafting
the
report
and
continuing
to
push
the
city
toward
achieving
higher
goals
of
energy
efficiency
in
building
design
and
then
also
want
to
thank
the
center
for
energy
environment
for
their
willingness
and
support
in
providing
information
on
homes.
How
homes
are
measured
and
can
achieve
these
guidelines
and
then
also
the
architectural
firm
cermak
rhodes,
which
has
recently
merged
with
lhb
for
their
willingness
to
allow
us
to
modify
a
home
that
they
designed
for
the
study?
F
So
with
that,
we
have
a
couple
ways
that
you
can
submit
your
comments
or
questions.
We
have
a
chat
feature
through
this
and
I
think
we
have
received
some
comments
and
questions
so
far,
and
then
we
also
have
our
email
address
mpls
homes
at
minneapolismn.gov
and
we'll
receive
any
comments
or
questions.
You
have
any
questions
and
answers
will
be
posted
to
the
cped
items
for
public
review
webpage,
which
is
also
where
this
policy
recommendation
lives
currently,
and
that
is
linked
on
this
slide
and
then
the
presentation
will
also
be
posted
publicly
on
the
webpage.
B
B
D
B
F
Yes,
so
we
did
actually
do
a
process
where
we
developed
a
scope
of
work.
That
was
then
posted
publicly
and
we
did
receive
two
bitter
or
not
bidders,
but
two
organizations
that
submitted
proposals
and
cped
staff
did
a
standard
review
process
that
resulted
in
intel
being
hired
to
complete
the
report.
So
there
was
a
process
where
individuals
or
organizations
could
apply
to
prepare.
The
report.
B
F
F
F
So
that
are
the
two
higher
standards
above
the
zero
energy
ready
program
and
that
incentive
would
allow
for
a
developer
that
intends
to
exceed
the
minimum
policy
requirement
of
the
city
to
build
to
either
passive
or
zero
energy
or
net
zero,
by
applying
for
either
up
to
twenty
percent
of
the
total
development
costs
or
up
to
ninety
thousand
dollars,
and
that
cost
would
be
to
cover
the
improvement
cost.
So
as
intel
featured
in
their
study.
B
Great,
thank
you
kevin.
This
next
question
is
similar,
but
I
think
has
enough
differences
that
we
should
go
ahead
and
publish
it
as
well.
First,
there
was
a
question:
will
these
slides
be
available
afterwards,
especially
the
finer
print
ones?
We
will
be
posting
this
entire
presentation
on
the
public
website,
where
we
have
recommendations
posted.
B
F
Yes,
so
we
do
plan
on
having
an
upcoming
application
process
where
individuals
or
developers
can
apply
for
funding
to
build
a
new
construction
property
on
either
a
privately
owned
site
or
a
city
owned
site.
There
are
some
requirements
that
come
along
with
that
program
and
some
of
those
include
income
qualification
and
not
a
net
loss
in
units
on
the
property,
and
then
we
also
have
some
affordability
mechanisms
that
come
in
place,
depending
on
where
the
property
is
within
the
city
of
minneapolis.
So
our
funding
is
restricted
in
certain
ways.
F
B
F
Yes,
so
the
the
question
about
hearing
the
funding,
so
our
incentive
that
we
are
proposing
for
passive
inc
net
zero
is
based
on
need.
So
a
developer
would
submit
a
pro
forma
of
costs
and
we
would
evaluate
their
application
based
upon
that
pro
forma,
to
determine
the
amount
of
funding
that
they're
requesting.
F
And
then
we
would
review
it
for
to
make
sure
it's
in
line
with
kind
of
the
estimates
that
we've
seen
and
that
the
numbers
are
sensible
and
so
the
it's
not
necessarily
a
tier
of
funding.
It's
more
based
on
demonstrated
need,
and
then
our
program
itself
also
provides
funding
for
gap,
financing
to
develop
new
construction
properties
as
well,
and
that
is
uses
the
similar
metric
that
we
evaluate
proposals
based
on
a
performance.
B
B
D
Well,
I
can
only
speak
to
the
first
part,
so
in
this
study
we've
conducted
other
studies
that
looked
at
the
embodied
carbon
there's
actually
quite
a
bit
of
information
available
online
in
various
places
where
I'm
happy
to
steer
somebody
if
they
want
to
go
deeper
on
that.
But
I
can't
speak
to
the
incentives
there.
I
would
like
to
offer
a
comment,
though,
that
embodied
carbon
is
certainly
an
issue
that
we
also
need
to
tackle
in
the
building
industry.
D
But
the
real
mountain
before
us
at
the
moment
is
operational,
carbon
and
tackling
embodied
carbons
before
we
tackle,
or
we
figure
out
how
to
tackle
the
operational
carbon
would
be
the
tail
wagging
the
dog.
So
first
we
got
to
get
the
operational
carbon
out
of
the
building,
because
that
is
an
ongoing
and
continuous
burden,
whereas
the
embodied
carbon
is
a
one-time
burden
and
also
depending
on
how
they're
built
these
buildings
here
stick
frame.
D
Mostly,
you
know:
wood
frame,
light
wood
frame
actually
very
light
on
the
embodied
carbon
footprint
based
on
the
right
materials,
and
so
it's
not
it's
not
really
an
issue
just
yet.
It
is
an
issue,
but
I
think
that
is
the
second
line
after
we
conquered
this
first
and
with
that,
I'm
happy
to
let
kevin
talk
about
any
incentives
that
they
might
have
in.
F
D
E
F
A
B
Do
zero
energy
ready
homes
or
passive
homes,
passive
homes
have
values
that
are
praised.
Higher
is
our
next
question
and
I
can
I
can
say
broadly
that
that
was
not
an
element
of
our
study,
cee
or
or
intep.
If
you
have
experience
that
you
could
frame
just
based
on
your
experience,
that
would
potentially
be
helpful.
D
D
B
D
F
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
everyone
that
attended
and
also
that
beared
with
us,
as
we
had
some
of
our
technology
challenges.
I
hope
that
the
information
that
we
presented
today
was
helpful
and
that,
if
you
have
additional
thoughts
or
questions
that
you
would
please
feel
free
to
share
them
through
the
email
at
minneapolis
homes
at
minneapolism.gov
and
we'd,
be
happy
to
also
engage
with
you.
B
A
Yeah,
I
was
just
going
to
say:
yes,
we
have
been
looking
at
that
and
we
would
like
to
see
some
things
being
done
there
and
take
at
least
the
disincentives
out
of
doing
insulated
homes,
and
there
are
quite
a
few-
you
know
just
won't-
go
into
the
details,
but
you
know
footprint
being
larger
and
basing
fees
on
footprint
size
and
things
like
that.
So
we
would
like
to
see
those
improvements
made
and
we'd
like
to
make
now
that
we
have
this
policy
going
forward.