Not Easy Being A Developer Around Here – And It’s About To Get Worse
Boston area developers already have their hands full desperately trying to keep projects on track amid the worst recession in generations.
Still, the one silver lining to the downturn has been a dramatic, 30 percent drop in construction prices. That could be just enough to push some projects into construction.
But wait, because even as construction costs go down, state officials and environmental activists are heaping on an array of tough new green building regs.
And developers brave enough to push ahead in this market may soon find their plans entangled in all sorts of costly green tape.
The latest darling of the Bay State’s save-the-earth-by-killing-all-our-jobs crowd is a new, “stretch’’ energy code passed by the Legislature this spring.
It allows local cities and towns to pass more stringent green building codes than the tough tones the state already requires.
And it could push up the cost of building a new home, never cheap around here, by another $8,000.
Kind of like the first-time buyer tax credit, in reverse.
All eyes are now on Cambridge which – big surprise – could become the first city in the state to up the ante here.
And it may be just a preview of what may soon be coming out the green-crazy Patrick Administration.
Later this fall, state environmental officials will roll out long-awaited regulations calling for expensive new stormwater runoff systems. The aim, to keep dirty water from running off the pavement into local waterways, is noble, but it could cost billions, warns NAIOP Massachusetts, which represents local developers.
The group fears the new rules will require the new systems anytime a hospital expands a parking lot or a developer puts up a new condo complex, no matter whether the Charles River is 100 feet or 100 miles away.
We’ll see, but it doesn’t look good.
October 19th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Welcome, you’re a little late to the party. The stretch code is not nearly as calamitous as you make it out to be. A) Communities have the choice of opting-in B) It allows for a more explicitly codified set of requirements, rather than random restrictions applied through special permitting C) It’s not that different from Boston’s Article 37, which has not killed construction on the other side of the river.
Rather than bemoan communities’ attempts to address the problems facing us, why not look at the positive effects of such efforts? That $8,000 doesn’t disappear into the ether, rather it goes towards materials and quality work, a boon to the economy you worship. Furthermore, that initial investment can easily be regained through lower utility bills. Money which is not redirected elsewhere for fossil fuels, but will remain in local pockets until it is spent on other goods and services. Will homeowners necessarily understand this? Perhaps not at first, but consider that another differentiating factor with which the invisible hand may optimize the market: those builders best able to convey the utility of an efficient home will succeed, and those which cannot won’t.