<html>
<body>
At 05:23 PM 9/3/2008, Wise, James A wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I think the commercial
building sector is much further along in reducing the cost differential
between green and standard practices than the residential one, especially
in this part of the PNW. BTW, most of LEED Residential was totally
irrelevant to the design and construction decisions that had to be made
by myself, the owner, on my homebuilding project. I looked everywhere for
a really helpful SFH green building guide or rating system when starting
out, but was severely disappointed in what I didn't
find.</blockquote><br><br>
<br>
I certainly second that, as someone who does commercial sector estimating
for a living and recently built myself a LEED-certifiable
house. I think the differential is higher, but maybe I did
more "gourmet" things because of our own concerns &
priorities. A really Green house, one that is sustainable for today
and the future, would I think as compared to a standard builders house
cost right now at least 20% more. Or even more on a same
floor area basis. Of course one of the major factors that helps
keep the cost differetntial down, is that a sustainable house certainly
ought to be smaller in area. To me that is about the one good thing
in the LEED rating system. But its hard to know what
one is comparing to what.<br>
the chance to look at various rating systems, and also getting real
feedback on performance, will help to nail things down. <br><br>
Dean Sherwin<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Looking forward to great
discussions ahead,</blockquote><br><br>
<br>
<font color="#800000">Dean Sherwin CPE<br>
Certified Professional Estimator<br>
LEED Accredited Professional<br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" color="#800000"><b><i>
CONSTRUCTION COST MANAGEMENT<br>
</b>3, Cherry Street<br>
PO Box 11<br>
Media, PA 19063-0011<br>
</i></font>(610)892 8860<br>
fax (610) 892 7862<br>
costman@verizon.net </body>
</html>