Page 161 - Green Building Through Integrated Design

GREEN BUILDING COST STUDIES 137

no statistically significant evidence that green buildings cost more per square foot
than conventional projects, primarily because so many factors influence the cost of
any particular type of building.* Based on these results, one would expect more pres-
sure from owners and developers for design and construction teams to aim for high
LEED goals, because these buildings are indeed perceived to offer higher value for
the money spent.
The study’s authors commented, “From this analysis we conclude that many projects
achieve sustainable design within their initial budget, or with very small supple-
mental funding. This suggests that owners are finding ways to incorporate project
goals and values, regardless of budget, by making choices. However, there is no one-
size-fits-all answer. Each building project is unique and should be considered as
such when addressing the cost and feasibility of LEED. Benchmarking with other
comparable projects can be valuable and informative, but not predictive.”
The 2006 follow-up report by Davis Langdon on 130 projects reported these con-
clusions: Most projects by good design teams have “embedded” 12 LEED points (out
of 26 needed for certification) and most could add up to 18 points to achieve basic
LEED certification with minimal total cost, through an integrated design approach. †
Of 60 LEED-seeking projects analyzed, more than half received no supplemental
budget to support sustainable goals. Of those that received additional funding, the sup-
plement was typically less than 5 percent, and supplemental funding was usually for
specific enhancements, most commonly photovoltaics. In other words, the results of
this study indicate that any design team should be able to build a LEED-certified
building at no additional cost, and a LEED-Silver building with only a minor cost
increase.

COSTS OF GREENING RESEARCH LABS
Davis Langdon also studied the impact of climate on the costs of a research lab. Costs
ranged from 2.7 to 6.3 percent premium for a LEED Gold project, and 1.0 to 3.7 percent
for a LEED Silver project (the study assumes the same design was constructed in various
cities at the same time).
The key cost message to owners and developers (and design and construction
teams) is that sustainability needs to be a “program” issue, that is, it needs to be
embedded in the goals of the project and not treated as an add-on cost element. This
conclusion is not just a matter of semantics; it goes to the very heart of the question,
“what is the purpose of this building or project?” If sustainability is not a core pur-
pose, then it’s going to cost more; if it is essential to the undertaking, then costs will
be in line with non-green buildings of the same type.

*Lisa Matthiessen and Peter Morris, “Costing Green: A Comprehensive Database,” Davis Langdon, 2004, avail-
able at www.davislangdon.com/USA/research. The 2006 update, “The Cost of Green Revisited,” can be found at
www.davislangdon.com/USA/Research/ResearchFinder/2007-The-Cost-of-Green-Revisited, accessed April 22,
2008.
† U.S. Green Building Council, November 2006, LEED Cost Workshop.