Managing Clients' Green Expectations
Monday, January 25, 2010 at 6:27AM 
LEED certification from the USGBC has done more to promote sustainable building practices in the US than any other force of the last decade. For some, the LEED program is indeed the equivalent of green building and design. So if LEED is the future and is a value add for clients shouldn’t architects and engineers advocate for certification? Recently, Stephen Del Percio outlined this argument in his blog post he pits two schools of thought against one another. The first is advocated by green building rock star Jerry Yudelson, who this past September gave two keynotes at a event sponsored by Central Texas Green Building Council. As quoted in the press release Yudelson presented the following:
clear evidence that high-level green outcomes add significant value to buildings.
“...What part of a 30 percent increase in value from LEED certification is hard to communicate?...You are doing your clients a disservice by letting them build projects without LEED certification,’ he said. ‘It almost amounts to dereliction of your duty as professionals....”
These quotes demonstrate Mr. Yudelson’s clear belief that it is the responsibility of architects and designers to advocate for LEED certification, under the guise that it is a clear value-add when designing a new building.
For his part, in the same blog post Del Percio, discusses why attorneys caution against such advocacy:
First, the design professional who functions as an advocate, extolling the promises of increased energy efficiency, asset values, and rental premiums of LEED-certified buildings is creating a corresponding high expectation in the eyes of his or her client.
...insurance coverage implications of the Energy Ace LEED certification “guarantee.” Unbridled green building advocacy could also provide an insurance carrier with the argument that the design professional has provided the functional equivalent of a guarantee- either LEED certification, performance, or otherwise- that might give the carrier grounds to deny coverage for negligence claims arising out of the project...
Build2Sustain’s blog always seeks to explore the issues important design/build pros. We feel it’s important to drill into these issues in more depth. So we’ve asked Stephen Del Percio and Shari Shapiro to be part of our first ever podcast. The podcast will discuss green certification and managing client expectation. We’re thrilled to be recording the podcast later this week for release next month.
In the meantime, we throw the comment section open to you. Architects-do you advocate for LEED certification in your design practice? Attorneys, what are the risks involved to advocating green building practices broadly and certification specifically? The best comments and questions will be used in our discussion with Stephen and Shari later this week.
Sustainable Risk Management
I am at heart a risk manager. Both here at Build2Sustain and at my Musings blog, I have discussed the issues to do with LEED de-certification because of energy reporting (or lack thereof) by the owner of the building. Remember the italicized portion of this last sentence, because the de-certification discussion has taken a new turn. Now, not only can the Owner of a building tank its LEED Certification through its own failure to comply with USGBC rules, the certification of a building can be challenged by third parties. Hidden in the USGBC LEED Policy Manual is language granting USGBC the right to retroactively review a project's LEED certification level on either it's own initiative or based upon the complaint of a third party.
My focus as a B2S advisory board member, as always, is on the "on the ground" risk management issues for designers, contractors and subcontractors on projects seeking LEED certification or other contractually or governmentally imposed energy efficiency goals. The real issue here, from my perspective as a construction lawyer, is the further implication of third party action in the potential liability of the construction professional who designs or constructs the building.
Third party action is a big issue with risk management under LEED or any other “green” building or energy efficiency system. The specter of actions beyond the control of those who will design and build our sustainable infrastructure abound. Just a few are outlined below:
The Eeyore in me fears that our much needed shift to sustainable, energy efficient building stock will be hindered by the worries of contractors. My hope (and, yes, I do have an optimistic side!) is that by asking these questions now, we can all work to deal with them and, with some luck and good planning, create a strong sustainable infrastructure that will be around for years to come.
Thankfully, good folks like those here at Build2Sustain are asking these questions and that’s a start.