ViewPoint: A new stretch energy code is not justified

This OpEd appeared in the Boston Business Journal on June 3, 2016.

In March 2015, Governor Charlie Baker signed Executive Order 562, initiating a comprehensive review process for all regulations. Only those regulations which are mandated by law or essential to the health, safety, environment, or welfare of the Commonwealth’s residents would be retained or modified, making Massachusetts a more efficient and competitive place to live and work.

Agencies must demonstrate, in their review, that there is a clearly identified need for governmental intervention; the costs do not exceed the benefits; a regulation does not exceed federal requirements; less restrictive and intrusive alternatives have been considered and found less desirable; and the regulation does not unduly and adversely affect the competitive environment in Massachusetts.

Based on these specific criteria, the business community is concerned that the Board of Building Regulations and Standards (BBRS) is currently considering a new Stretch Energy Code as it develops the 9th edition of the statewide building code. Besides the fact that this Stretch Code undermines the statutory requirement that there be a uniform State Building/Energy Code, there is no good reason for it. This proposed energy code is unnecessary and fails the regulatory review standards, and the Baker Administration and the BBRS should not advance it.

The Stretch Energy Code was originally adopted in May 2009, despite strong opposition from the business community.  The code required commercial and residential construction in those communities that voted to adopt it to be approximately 20% more energy efficient than the statewide code. The new stretch energy code would require a 15% increase in energy efficiency over the current code. The Stretch Code has caused confusion among local building inspectors and developers.  Due to this and several other reasons, a new version of the Stretch Energy Code has never been adopted, even when the statewide code changed.  In fact, at the close of the Patrick Administration, the BBRS voted not to advance a new draft of the Stretch Energy Code.  However, in April 2015, this decision was reversed.

Massachusetts is already the most energy efficient state in the nation, with the most aggressive energy efficiency targets.  Furthermore, Massachusetts will be one of only a handful of states in the nation to adopt the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) statewide.  Since the Green Communities Act requires the adoption of the latest IECC (every three years), the Commonwealth’s position as a national leader in energy efficiency will be ensured even without a Stretch Code.  Anything beyond that is overly burdensome and creates a significant competitive disadvantage for Massachusetts.

It is important to note that there is no statutory requirement to adopt or update a Stretch Energy Code.  There is no mention of it in any statute, and it is only the Department of Energy Resources’ (DOER) policy that encourages the creation of this code.

According to DOER, the changes to the Stretch Code would take effect automatically in stretch code communities without any local vote.  Many municipalities had no idea they would be subject to an automatic upgrade.

The business community continues to support a uniform statewide building and energy code.  We believe a new Stretch Energy Code is unnecessary, will hinder economic development, and would impose an unfair and difficult burden on local building officials and the construction industry.  We urge the Baker Administration and the BBRS to eliminate the Stretch Energy Code, once and for all, and acknowledge the latest version of the IECC as the only energy code in Massachusetts.

David Begelfer is the CEO of NAIOP Massachusetts, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association.

As Boston Proposes CPA, Issues to Consider

The Boston City Council’s Committee on Government Operations scheduled a public hearing for Tuesday, March 29 to discuss the city’s adoption of the Massachusetts Community Preservation Act (CPA). If approved by the City Council to move forward, the question would be put to the voters of Boston on this November’s ballot. This would result in a 1% property tax surcharge on commercial and residential properties starting in fiscal year 2018 (with the first $100,000 in value exempt as well as a 100% exemption for those who qualify for low-income housing or low or moderate income senior housing). Communities that adopt the CPA can decide on the distribution of funds across the three areas covered under the CPA, as long as each area – open space, historic preservation and affordable housing – receives at least 10 percent of the total available.

The Mayor has released a comprehensive housing plan for Boston, including objectives to produce 53,000 new units of housing. The report, Housing a Changing City – Boston 2030, estimates the CPA would generate $20 million annually, including state matching funds, of which 50% or $10 million would be dedicated to new housing funds. There is no question that Mayor Walsh and his team are very committed to providing affordable and middle income housing, as confirmed by the various initiatives the Administration has advanced in recent months.

The business community is also concerned about the lack of workforce housing.  Without housing that can be affordable to working individuals, couples and families, the region will not be able to maintain the exceptional economic growth it is currently experiencing. However, as City Council considers putting this on the ballot, a few questions should be asked and answered:

  • How much of these funds will end up supporting middle income housing? With a statutory requirement that housing produced under the CPA be for persons and families whose income is less than 100% of the AMI, it is unclear how middle income housing would be created. Furthermore, the independent CPA committee that will oversee the use of CPA funds is free to spend these funds in any of the three prescribed uses (beyond the 10% statutory requirement).
  • There is no requirement for the City to detail exactly how the CPA funds will be used to attain its goals. One would think that the days of throwing money at a problem and hoping for a good outcome are in the past. The MBTA operated like that for years, and we are seeing the results very clearly. What exactly is the plan to produce more affordable and workforce housing with this additional revenue?
  • How much of an impact will the CPA make? Preliminary estimates show that if half of the CPA funds ($10 million) were used for traditional affordable housing, there would only be 40-50 units built in a year. That is helpful, but is it worth it to impose new taxes on residential and commercial properties? The last time the CPA was proposed in Boston, it was estimated that the business community would be paying 81% of the total, as a consequence of real estate tax classification and the residential exemption. In addition, the City has also increased the requirements for new developments under the Inclusionary Development Policy and higher linkage payments for new commercial development are coming.

As a result of the recent building boom, the city’s revenue from real estate taxes is the largest in history. While having more money from the CPA for the City sounds great, the costs and benefits must be weighed before making this decision.

Speaking of Real Estate

NAIOP Massachusetts is kicking off a video series we will be calling “Speaking of Real Estate”.

The idea behind this effort is to interview leaders in the commercial real estate industry, including developers, owners, investors, as well as some of the heads of the major professional service firms that support our business.

We are starting with a very candid discussion between Tom Alperin, President, National Development and Marc Margulies, Founder and Principal, Margulies Perruzzi Architects. They cover a range of topics that include affordable housing, new design considerations, shared economy, and looking to the future for the industry.

We plan on bringing you the opportunity to hear from individuals that are in the forefront of creating our new urban and suburban “live, work and play” environments. Who are some CRE leaders you would like to hear from in this series? Let us know in the comments section below.

A Little Late, But Welcome to Massachusetts, Steve!

WynnEverettIt appears that the lengthy, sometimes contentious, legal battle between Wynn Resorts Chairman Steve Wynn and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh is over. A “surrounding community” agreement was reached by both parties for the development of an Everett casino. The agreement includes:

  • $31 million over 15 years for community impact
  • $25 million over 10 years for Sullivan Square infrastructure improvements
  • $11 million for traffic mitigation in Charlestown
  • $250,000 for a regional working group on a “long-term fix” for Sullivan Square
  • a “good faith effort” to purchase $20 million annually over 15 years from Boston businesses
  • $1 million for reimbursement of Boston’s professional (legal) expenses.

Wynn Resorts Everett will be a $1.7 billion, five-star, premier destination resort with a 600 all-suite room hotel in Everett, located off Lower Broadway, at the site of the heavily contaminated, former Monsanto Chemical plant. Millions of dollars will be invested to clean and remediate the site and to construct infrastructure and traffic betterments.

The Commonwealth will receive a licensing fee of $85 million, along with 25% of gross gaming revenues, which are estimated to be $260 million annually.

There will be 4,000 full time jobs, as well as over 3,600 construction jobs.

For Everett:

  • $30 million in advanced payments for a Community Enhancement Fund payable during the construction period
  • $5 million Community Impact Fee, increasing annually
  • $20 million for real estate taxes, increasing annually (almost 25% of the city’s tax base)
  • $250,000 contribution to Everett Citizens Foundation
  • $50,000 annual payment to purchase vouchers/gift certificates from Everett businesses to be distributed by Wynn as part of its loyalty programs
  • An estimated $2.5 million per year in hotel and restaurant taxes
  • An active waterfront park with a winter garden and harbor walk will be created

That’s quite a financial commitment by an out-of-state company to the Commonwealth. In case you haven’t heard it before, welcome to Massachusetts!

A Great Start for Economic Development Under the Baker/Polito Administration

BakerGovernor Charlie Baker and Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito just filed the administration’s Economic Development bill with $1 billion to be invested over the next five years into economic development, housing and job training across the Commonwealth.

A core principal of this legislation is to take various existing programs and make enhancements to them so that they become more widely used, more effective, recapitalized, and more user-friendly:

  • MassWorks ($500 million proposed capital authorization): Reauthorizes a capital grant program that provides municipalities and other public entities with public infrastructure grants to support economic development and job creation.
  • Brownfields Redevelopment Fund ($75 million proposed capital authorization): Moves funding for the state’s Brownfields Redevelopment Fund to the capital program, providing a reliable long-term funding stream for a fund that is the Commonwealth’s primary tool for facilitating the redevelopment of contaminated properties.
  • Housing-Related Tax Increment Financing: Supports housing production in town centers by reforming a seldom-used local-only smart growth tax incentive program, removing onerous regulations, and allowing communities to set their own affordability requirements.
  • Housing Development Incentive Program (HDIP) Reform: Supports the development of market-rate housing in Gateway Cities by allowing credits to support new construction, and by raising the formula that sets housing development incentives.
  • I-Cubed Reform: Reforms the I-Cubed infrastructure program by removing unnecessary program requirements (such as eliminating the per-municipality cap on the number of projects that may participate and raising the aggregate limit of funds from the I-cubed program that may be used in any one municipality from 31% to 50%) building flexibility into the program, and aligning program requirements with the demonstrated project pipeline.
  • Economic Development Incentive Program (EDIP) Reforms: Builds accountability in the state’s primary job-creation incentive program by strengthening the link between the issuance of tax credits, and job creation that would not otherwise occur; adds flexibility to the incentive program by eliminating obsolete formula-driven incentive categories, and by creating a new Extraordinary Development Opportunity designation.

In addition, the bill creates two important provisions:

  • Site Readiness Fund ($25 million proposed capital authorization): Advances regional job creation by creating a new fund for site assembly and pre-development activities (including site assessment and cleanup) that support regionally significant commercial or industrial development opportunities.
  • “Starter Home” Zoning: Incentivizes the creation of smaller, denser, and more affordable single-family homes by creating a new starter home option under the Chapter 40R smart growth housing program. These projects will also allow the municipality to be eligible for school reimbursements under Chapter 40S.
  • Parking Management Districts: Aligns local parking policies with broader economic development priorities by enabling municipalities to opt into creating demand-based parking fees, and allowing parking fees to support capital improvements in designated districts, like downtowns.

In addition, there are new programs with a Massachusetts Innovation Initiative, Workforce Development, and Economic Competitiveness.

We are very supportive of the bill, which contains many of NAIOP’s priorities. This legislation will be one of NAIOP’s top priorities for the remainder of the legislative session.

Welcome to Your New Home, General Electric

2000px-General_Electric_logo.svg

The Greater Boston region’s research and higher education institutions are the envy of most of the world. While financial incentives helped seal the General Electric deal, this was not a cost-driven determination. It was a desire by the company to be housed in an innovation ecosystem that can provide the highest levels of skilled talent and technology. And, as a company doing business worldwide, GE will become an integral part of the local culture that successfully produces new ideas, products and technologies.

Kudos to Governor Baker and Mayor Walsh! This is a clear endorsement for the Commonwealth’s and the City‘s ability to market the region and all it has to offer to a business that could have relocated anywhere in the country (even in locations that could have provided greater financial incentives). The Legislature also deserves recognition for the important economic development bills passed over the last 6 years, which provided many of the tools needed to attract and close the deal with GE.

We may not have an Olympics here in Boston to remind the world that we are a global leader, but we do have the vote of a $130 billion high-tech industrial company (the 8th largest U.S. corporation) who will bring over 800 jobs to the “Innovation” Seaport District. Welcome home, General Electric.

Event Recap: Leadership Lunch + Learn at 101 Seaport

The following blog post was written by Chloe Louise Bouscaren, Marketing and Business Development at CBT Architects.

“An Inventive Setting to Spark Inventive Thinking”

IMG_20151111_122627151On Wednesday, Nov 9th NAIOP hosted a Members-Only Leadership Luncheon at 101 Seaport Boulevard, the new home for PricewaterhouseCoopers, a multinational professional services network. PwC relocated 3000 employees from 125 High Street to Boston’s Seaport District. Shawn Hurley, the Executive Vice President and Regional Manager of SKANSKA USA Commercial Development hosted NAIOP on the building’s 7th floor, the only space that has yet to be leased. Shawn was joined by Charley Leatherbee, VP of Development; Levi Reilly, Director of Development; and Patrick Sousa, Manager of Development, who all played important roles in the success of this high-profile project.

IMG_20151111_121118778The newly constructed 17-story, 440,000 RSF, LEED Platinum state-of-the-art office building was developed by SKANKSA USA Commercial Development Team in Boston. Highlights included a chilled beam mechanical system, triple glazing curtain wall, 300 underground parking spaces, world class retail by WS Development, expansive views of the harbor and Seaport, conference and training centers, and virtually column free floorplates. 82% of the building is occupied by PwC, tenants Red Thread and Skanska will be joining them soon. NKGF’s Dave Martel and Bill Anderson are responsible for the leasing and deal negotiation.IMG_20151111_120951643_TOP

Located on what will be the new Seaport Square Green, 101 Seaport connects directly to Fan Pier Park, creating a continuous public space that reaches Boston Harbor and connects to the Harborwalk Grand civic lawn to support active recreation and public events.CBT2

SKANSKA is also currently working a neighboring 17-story office tower, 121 Seaport, as well as Watermark Seaport, a 300-unit residential complex both on neighboring parcels.CTjJnD2VAAAiuyx.jpg large

For those who have yet to hear Shawn’s presentations on SKANKSA’s developments in the Seaport and beyond, his confidence and presence is unparalleled. Shawn has an innate way of making an audience feel comfortable and that day, we all felt we were part of something big. SKANSKA is clearly making development history in Boston and Shawn and his group are leading that charge the titans of the real estate industry. Hats off gents.

Quick Project Stats
Project Cost: $290M
Project Duration: 26 months
PwC Employees: 3000 (20% more people in 12% less space)
Designer / Design Firm: Jonathan McGuiness, Jacobs Engineering Group

NAIOP’s on-going Leadership Lunch and Learn series is open only to Members and offers unparalleled access to top local real estate leaders. Attendees get an inside look at the area’s most active CRE companies and hear about their latest developments, recent activity, upcoming projects, and more. Not yet a NAIOP Member? Join today!

Ridesharing May be Saved by Technology

RideshareThe Clean Air Act was created to respond to the ever-increasing air pollution that has come from industrial expansion and a reliance on fossil fuels for energy and transportation. Automobiles are a major source of air pollution (e.g. hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide). It is estimated that road traffic accounts for about 40 percent of the pollution that contributes to ground-level ozone (the main ingredient in smog).

Single occupancy vehicles have long dominated the roadways, especially for commuters. In an effort to reduce pollution, states, like Massachusetts, have adopted Rideshare Programs. Ridesharing is the sharing of vehicles by passengers to reduce vehicle trips, traffic congestion and automobile emissions. Ridesharing (carpooling, vanpooling, public transport), as well as bicycle commuting and walking, are all goals of these programs.

Locally, the idea has been for Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) to work with large employers (with more than 1,000 employees) to promote commuting options. The program depends on corporate surveys of worker commuter patterns, providing a menu of commuting options, offering incentives, and documenting the resulting annual changes in patterns, hopefully to successfully meet a specific performance goal of reducing by 25 percent the number of times commuters drive alone to work.

Unfortunately, for various reasons, these programs have had limited success, but continue to burden the employer with annual compliance costs. Part of the problem has always been the difficulty of organizing car-pooling and the uncertainties due to the drivers’ and passengers’ daily schedules.

We are all getting accustomed to technology searching for logistical problems to solve. The ridesharing conundrum is one of those problems and “real-time ridesharing” are the solutions beginning to be provided by Transportation Network Companies, such as LyftUber and Sidecar. These companies, with their mobile apps, arrange one-time rides on an on-demand basis.

Both Lyft (Lyft Line) and Uber have now introduced a carpooling service in Boston. Passengers along a route get in the car at a price cheaper than the ride-for-hire alternative. The trip has to maintain its original route as it picks up other customers, who have to be ready immediately to get in the car when it arrives for them.

Although this service is currently limited to the Boston/Cambridge market, there is no question that an expansion of this service into the suburban market is inevitable.

It is also not very difficult to foresee an app that allows single occupancy drivers to easily connect with fellow commuters heading in the same direction, on a ride by ride basis. With no long-term commitments and many scheduling alternatives available, it seems like an easy fix. Yeah, we’ve got an app for that!

Business Coalition Urges Governor and Legislature to Create World-Class Transit System

A broad coalition of 25 business associations representing large and small employers from a wide range of industries today issued the following statement urging the Governor and the Legislature to adopt the recent recommendations made by the Special Panel to Review the MBTA and to swiftly begin the task of fixing the state’s public transit system:

Business Coalition Statement in Support of a World-Class Transit System

The Challenge
The winter of 2015 highlighted the Commonwealth’s transportation vulnerabilities, particularly for the MBTA. While school and business cancellations, a dramatic drop in retail sales, and an increase in public safety risks result from many major winter storms, the complete shutdown of the MBTA followed by a prolonged reduction in services for the subways and commuter rails are not the norm.
The unreliability of our public transit system caused many businesses to lose substantial revenues from the loss of productivity due to delays and/or the inability of workers to get to work. Many hourly workers forfeited wages; many retailers forfeited sales; many restaurants forfeited patrons; and the Commonwealth forfeited the income, sales and meals tax associated therewith. A sub-optimal public transit system also caused roadways to be more congested than usual and commuting times to grow to unreasonable lengths for those who opted to drive or were transporting goods. The adverse financial impacts totaled in the billions of dollars. This is unacceptable and must not be repeated.

The Framework
Due to the urgency of fixing the MBTA and the need for the public transit system to be reliable and fully functional, the undersigned business organizations are requesting policy makers to address the following issues:
• Make the T a customer-focused organization that provides first-rate service and clear communication while instilling confidence in its ridership.
• Provide greater accountability and transparency for the T’s governance and management practices to ensure the entity is efficiently and effectively run while employing a productive workforce.
• Develop a long-term strategic and capital plan for the T that efficiently uses its resources to enhance the current capabilities and future needs of the T, businesses and workers, while providing sufficient funding to cover the costs.
• Overhaul the T’s procurement and maintenance practices so that the system is safe, reliable and in a state of good repair.
• Establish metrics, milestones and regular reporting to ensure proper implementation of the T reforms within a reasonable period of time.
• Ensure that the T balances its operating budget without the need for ever-increasing state assistance each year.

The Solution
The undersigned support this position and urge the Governor and the Legislature to act swiftly so we can begin the arduous task of fixing the state’s public transit system.

Following a thorough analysis of the various recommendations from the Governor’s Special Panel to Review the MBTA, and measured against the principles outlined above, we endorse the Panel’s proposal and urge the Legislature to adopt the plan immediately.

The following business organizations support this statement:
495/MetroWest Partnership
Affiliated Chambers of Commerce of Greater Springfield
American Council of Engineering Companies of Massachusetts
Associated Industries of Massachusetts
Associated Subcontractors of Massachusetts
Construction Industries of Massachusetts
Environmental Business Council
Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce
Greater Boston Real Estate Board
Massachusetts Biotechnology Council
Massachusetts Chemistry & Technology Alliance
Massachusetts High Tech Council
Massachusetts Lodging Association
Massachusetts Petroleum Council
Massachusetts Restaurant Association
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation
Massachusetts Technology Leadership Council
Massachusetts Business Roundtable
Metro South Chamber of Commerce
NAIOP Massachusetts, The Commercial Real Estate Development Association
National Federation of Independent Businesses
Neponset Valley Chamber of Commerce
North Shore Chamber of Commerce
Retailers Association of Massachusetts
South Shore Chamber of Commerce

Quotes from Business Coalition Members:
“The unreliability of the public transit system has caused many businesses to lose substantial revenues from the loss of productivity due to delays and the inability of workers to get to work,” said Richard Lord, President and Chief Executive Officer of Associated Industries of Massachusetts (AIM).

Eileen McAnneny, President of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said, “Now that the breadth and severity of the problems confronting the MBTA have been revealed and the price of inaction is evident, we have a real opportunity to move forward with a plan for transforming the MBTA into a modern, world-class public transit system.”

“The transit system experienced a ‘stress test’ and failed. The time is right to not only fix today’s MBTA, but ensure that it will meet future demands,” said David Begelfer, CEO of NAIOP Massachusetts, The Commercial Real Estate Development Association.

“The MBTA is critical to Greater Boston’s economy. Workers, customers, patients, students and tourists depend on it every day. We need to take the T to the next level right away,” said Paul Guzzi, President and CEO of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce.

Farewell to Real Estate Icon Norman Leventhal

NBLNorman B. Leventhal passed away April 5, 2015 and his loss is being felt not only by those who knew him, worked with him, and admired him, but by so many of the residents and workers in the state, who benefited by his vision and skills as a master builder.

He created landmarks throughout the City of Boston and in many of its surrounding communities. Each stands out as a thoughtful creation, built to endure throughout the ages.

The list of his projects would populate any list of Boston’s great buildings: Rowes Wharf, Center Plaza, 75 State Street, One Post Office Square, Meridien Hotel, South Station, and the Post Office Square park/garage.

Norman was passionate about his work, his family, and his city. His philanthropic interests were far and wide. He never stopped caring.

Our condolences go out to his wife and family.