At a recent CCIM conference that I attended, one of the sessions covered the movement toward Built Green and LEED Certified commercial buildings. For WA State, we’re in a good position for many companies because the current building codes for our state already meet many of the compliance elements of the LEED certifications. The presenters stated that, on average, it only added anywhere from 3-10% to the cost of construction to go for a LEED certification and the long run prospects for increased sale or leasing of the space covered or made up for this differential.
They also made mention that a large number of companies are putting into their business plans a requirement to “go green” and part of that includes the work environment. The thought goes that if shopping for a new location, the business will gravitate to the newer, “green” building over the older non-green building.
Well, that’s all well and good, but I couldn’t help but think to myself, if all the businesses are pushing to be in new construction that meets these green or LEED standards, what will happen to the old buildings? Will they just sit vacant? Does that foretell a larger problem down the road? It’s too early to tell, but I don’t see us blowing up all the old inventory just to make room for the new “green” alternatives. That doesn’t make any sense either.
To read what others have to say about this trend and how it will affect employers and landlords over the next few years, take a look at this article I received this week from my CoStar membership (a commercial property listing site). The study that is cited says that within 3 years landlords who aren’t moving toward the sustainability movement will be getting hurt in their wallets.
This applies not only to commercial buildings that house businesses, but for those that house residential condos. The first Silver LEED certified condo building in Seattle was the 5th & Madison building. At a recent interview held by a marketing firm, hired by Vulcan, questions were asked whether or not LEED certification was important to buyers.
If you’re a commercial property owner, it would be wise to start looking at ways you can upgrade or update your property to meet the demand for sustainability. Heck, have you seen the recent IBM ads talking about energy consumption? Sure, the greenwashing does still have to do with money (profits), but you can be profitable and “green” too, can’t you? Doesn’t helping a company be more profitable help them decide to choose cleaner options over more negatively impacting the environment? If the message of green can go that high up the business food chain, it’s going to trickle down to the smaller players too.
And, if your property can help reduce a company’s legal liabilities for worker health issues which in turn helps productivity at the business, and provide a positive marketing message when selling or leasing the property, can it be all that bad?
You tell me… I’m open to hearing what you’re doing….
