2017 NORTH CAROLINA

ENERGY EFFICIENT, GREEN AND HIGH PERFORMANCE

HOME AND BUILDING INVENTORY REPORT

Market research and best practices for increasing consumer awareness

of and financial value for high performance homes and buildings in
North Carolina

◀ 1 ▶
About North Carolina Building
Performance Association
North Carolina Building Performance Association (NCBPA) is a 501(c)(6) not-for- Authors:
profit trade association of building performance professionals and companies
seeking to lead high performance construction in the state through quality
construction, workforce development, political advocacy, public education and
SAJAD HOSSEINI
member services. The association works with member companies and partner
organizations to promote opportunities that improve the quality of buildings in
RYAN MILLER
North Carolina so that all residents and businesses can live and work in healthy,
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
safe, durable, cost-effective and environmentally-friendly homes and buildings.
Visit www.BuildingNC.org for more information.
N C B PA w o u l d l i ke t o t h a n k
MetroStudy and RESNET® for
About this report providing data for the sale price
analysis, National Association
of Home Builders (NAHB) for
In 2015, NCBPA completed a first-of-its-kind report that analyzed the state’s market
of energy efficient, green and high performance homes and buildings. The report funding the sale price analysis
quantified the number of units in the state, defined areas of strong and weak section of this report and the
saturation, and provided recommendations to industry stakeholders seeking to associations’ member companies
grow and promote the industry. A key finding of the report was a lack of available and partners for providing data
high performance home data in Multiple Listing Services (MLS) directories. This used in the study.
data is needed to help stakeholders including Realtors®, appraisers, lenders and
consumers identify these homes and attribute a greater market value to them.

Now in its third year, the inventory report has grown to incorporate data from more
than 42 local, state, regional and national certification and rating programs. As
in prior years, NCBPA collected valuable address-level HERS® Index Score data
from rating companies and Providers directly but lacks a complete set of rating
data to use in the study. As a result, NCBPA has included non-address level HERS®
Index Scores to ensure that the total number of ratings for 2013 to 2016 matches
the total reported by RESNET®. Subsequently, some duplicate data exists. These
instances are detailed in the report where relevant.

For the first time, the 2017 report includes a sale price analysis of the 2015
to 2016 sales of high performance homes compared to all home sales in the
Charlotte, Triad and Triangle markets. The recommendations section of the report
was updated to include activities underway that support improved valuation of
high performance homes and buildings. Next year, NCBPA plans to add appraised
values to the residential data and perform the sale price and appraised value
analysis on commercial buildings.

Data collection and integrity continues to be an issue that NCBPA feels is properly
addressed in the analysis and report. This study should be considered an estimate
of the unit inventory and market-based pricing in North Carolina and provide
reason for increased availability and transparency of data to support industry
growth and development. NCBPA is working to obtain more accurate address-level
data from the multiple sources involved to improve the accuracy and reliability of
this report in future years.

◀ 2 ▶
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Data Collection and Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Data Collection and Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Analytical Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Data Assumptions and Collection Barriers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Programs and Rating Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2017 Inventory Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Total Quantity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Residential Homes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Commercial Buildings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Certification and Rating Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Metro Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Minor Metro Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Non-Metro Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Conclusions and Key Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

High Performance Home Sale Price Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Assumptions and Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Conclusions and Key Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Market Development Needs and Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

S1. Improve Consumer Education Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
S2. Build Support Amongst Key Stakeholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
S3. Workforce Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
S4. Recognition of Total Cost of Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
S5. Improve Availability of Home and Building Certification Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
S6. Local Rebate and Incentive Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
S7. Invest in New Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
S8. Increase Consumer and Vendor Access to Utility Usage Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
S9. Improve Building and Energy Code Requirements and Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
S10. Create Innovative Financing Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
S11. Improving Market Valuation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
S12. Document and Communicate Features Using Consistent, Data-Driven and Standardized Methods. . . . . . . . . . . 56
S13: Provide Visibility and Tracking of Inventories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
S14: Offer Focused Continuing Education Opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
S15: Green North Carolina’s MLS Directories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
S16: Incorporate Data into Sales and Appraisal Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
S17: Develop Automated Systems Integrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
S18. Ensure Selection of Qualified Appraisers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
S19: Engage Lending Community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
S20. Pilot Improvement Projects with Local Stakeholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Appendix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Best Practices for “Greening” of MLS Directories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Best Practices for Homebuilders to Impact “Green” MLS Efforts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Supportive Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
◀ 3 ▶
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY

The National Perspective:

“There is increasing interest in high performance construction,
specifically green building certification for multifamily
new construction and rehab projects throughout the U.S. We
believe this is due to several factors. In the market rate sector,
many developers are taking advantage of financing and utility
incentives and some developers have a corporate policy to certify
all their projects green. In the affordable housing sector, high
performance construction is often required or heavily incentivized
in Low Income Housing Tax Credit allocation. In the single-family
housing market, we expect demand for green and high performance
construction will continue to grow slowly over time.”

Carl Seville
PARTNER AT SK COLLABORATIVE IN ATLANTA, GA

◀ 4 ▶
 HOW WAS THIS NCBPA’s 2017 inventory report identified 34,152 energy
efficient, green and high performance home and building
DATA COLLECTED? units1 being built or retrofitted in North Carolina in 2016.
This is a slight decline from 34,628 units in the prior year.
In total, the study has identified 198,525 units since 2007.

42
Different Programs
The study found 42 unique programs
available in North Carolina to certify or rate
Active in NC
homes and buildings for energy efficiency, 2017
green or high performance features. Of

116,430

1.1%Buildings
Existing
48
these, NCBPA analyzed valid data from 20
programs provided by 48 unique companies
Individual Data Points
Were Analyzed and organizations participating in or
Companies &
Organizations administering the programs. The 42
Provided Data available programs is a significant
increase from the 29 identified in 2015.

Of the 34,152 units identified in 2016, just 293 are existing homes or buildings (0.9%).
Of the 198,525 units identified since 2007, 98.9% are new construction and 1.1% are existing
construction. NCBPA believes the 1.1% data point does not reflect the actual retrofit market,
but instead indicates a lack of program use and available data.

Residential single family units continue to lead all building types with 83.9% of 2016
units compared to 15.1% for residential multifamily and 1.0% for commercial. 2016 was,
however, the largest year for residential multifamily unit reporting since 2007. In total,
171,075 of units reported since 2007 are residential single family (86.2%), 20,775 are
residential multifamily (10.5%), 2,897 are commercial buildings (1.5%) and 3,778
are manufactured homes (1.9%). Commercial units decreased by 17% in 2016
compared to 2015.

2016 data shows that the HERS® Index Score is the most-frequently used
program in the state with 15,568 units (45.6%), followed by 9,581 units
for ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes (28.1%), 3,790 units for Duke Energy
Progress’ Residential New Construction Program (11.2%) and 3,646 units for
the National Green Building Standard™ program (10.7%). A HERS® Index
Score is created in each of these programs.
98.9% New Construction
Since 2007, the ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes program leads all
programs with with 82,515 units (41.6%) and is followed by HERS®

198,525
Index Score with 64,174 units (32.3%) and National Green
Building StandardTM with 12,463 units (6.3%).

TOTAL UNITS IDENTIFIED

2007 - 2016
1
Units are defined in this report as individual single or multi-family homes
or buildings built or retrofitted between 2007 - 2016 that meet or exceed
energy efficient, green or high performance certification or rating program
standards.

◀ 5 ▶
 WHERE ARE THE of all units are attributable to the

UNITS LOCATED? 88.7% Asheville, Charlotte, Triad, Triangle

and Wilmington metro areas

Since 2007, 176,013 of all units are attributable to the Asheville, Charlotte, Triad, Triangle and Wilmington metro
areas (88.7%). In minor metro areas defined independently by the study as cities and counties located in or near
Greenville, Jacksonville and Fayetteville, the unit volume has been decreasing steadily over the past four years. For
all other rural cities and counties included in the study, residential single family units saw a large decline in 2016,
whereas residential multifamily increased.

WHAT PROGRAMS CARRY THE MOST VALUE PER SQUARE FOOT?

NGBS LEED® FOR ENERGY STAR® HERS® INDEX GREEN BUILT NC
HOMES SCORE
$143.44 $116.68 $116.42 $114.48 $89.71
57 HOME SALES 1,172 HOME SALES 12 HOME SALES
32 HOME SALES 2,635 HOME SALES

NC is NC is NC is NC is
in the USA in the USA in the USA in the USA

For the first time in the study’s history, the 2017 report includes an analysis of the sale prices and price per square
footage of 3,908 high performance homes sold in 2015 and 2016 in the Charlotte, Triad and Triangle markets.
These values are compared to all home sales in those metro markets (9.2% of the total) to demonstrate that, on
average, high performance homes have higher sale prices than all homes.

On average, high performance homes in the Triangle market are 2,962 square feet and 14.4% larger in size than
the average of all homes in the market. High performance homes in the Charlotte market have the smallest square
footage increase, 5.6%, compared to homes in the Triangle and Triad markets. High performance homes in the
Triangle market have the highest average sale price, $400,989, of each of the metro areas, a 22.0% increase over
all homes in the metro areas. Combined, high performance homes in all metro areas have an average sale price of
$339,210, a 9.5% increase over all homes. The Triangle market has the largest increase in average price median,
32.0%, of any of the metro areas.

Of the five certification and rating programs included in the sale price analysis, the program with the highest
average price per square foot across the three metro areas combined is the National Green Building StandardTM
certification at $143.44. LEED® for Homes followed at $116.68 and ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes at $116.42.
NCBPA attributes the value of energy efficiency, green and high performance certifications and ratings to increased
sale prices as correlation only, not causation. A variety of other factors, such as kitchen upgrades and lot size that
impact the sale price of a home are not included in this analysis.

Most of the programs included in this study utilitize HERS® Index Scores as a compliance path. A HERS® Index
Score is a potential starting point to obtaining higher sale prices for high performance homes.

◀ 6 ▶
 “The push toward greater energy efficiency in homes has become a great
equalizer for builders. Because of national energy efficiency programs and codes,
consumers have begun to expect higher levels of energy efficiency – the bar has
been raised. Now, consumers are coming to realize and appreciate more and more
the benefits of a comprehensively high-performance home that builds on that
higher efficiency baseline and provides a healthier indoor environment, more
durability, and less maintenance in addition. It’s providing consumers a home
that is an overall better investment.”

Michelle Foster
VICE PRESIDENT, INNOVATION SERVICES FOR HOME INNOVATION RESEARCH LABS

Conclusion
The 2017 report concludes with updates on 20 market activites that NCBPA and partner organizations
have been working on in the past year to improve the market valuation of high performance homes
and buildings in the state. Since the 2015 report was released, NCBPA has become a leader in
advocating for open and transparent access to program data for use in “greening” MLS directories.

If NCBPA’s efforts to add more “green” fields and auto-populate local, state, regional and national
program data were successful in just three metro markets in North Carolina, the enhancements
would apply to roughly 40% of the national MLS market, yielding benefits to industry stakeholders
and consumers across the country.

To support continued progress on these efforts in North Carolina and other states, the report’s
Appendix includes best practices that local MLS directories can follow to “green” their MLS systems,
as well as best practices for homebuilders to participate in and benefit from these efforts.

NCBPA would like to thank the 48 organizations that provided data for this study.
Please contact NCBPA’s Executive Director Ryan Miller at 919-841-6207 or [email protected]
for questions, comments or more information on the study.

◀ 7 ▶
DATA
COLLECTION
AND
METHODOLOGY

◀ 8 ▶
Data Collection and Sources
Each year since 2015, NCBPA has collected and analyzed certification and rating program data from local, state, regional
and national builders, contractors, utilities and program administrators for this study. The resulting analysis identifies
the quantities and types of energy efficient, green and high performance homes and buildings built or retrofitted in
North Carolina since 2007. For the 2016 report, 42 unique “programs” were identified that could be used to certify or
rate homes or buildings to this criteria. Of these 42, NCBPA received valid data on 20 programs from a total of 48 unique
sources2. In total, NCBPA has collected 116,430 individual data points with 22,857 provided in 2016.

Analytical Methodology
Homes and buildings are deemed to be energy efficient, green or high performance if they are attributed to any one of
the 42 programs. In many cases, homes and buildings are submitted with multiple program attributions; a home with
both a HERS® Index Score and ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes certification is a common example. In these cases and
only where street addresses are available and can be matched, only one home or building is reported. For program-
specific reporting, both programs are counted. For the full data set, 16,514 (14.2%) individual data points contain full
addresses. Examples of how homes and buildings qualify for the study include:

▶▶ ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes Certification = energy efficient new home

▶▶ HERS® Index Score = energy efficient new home

▶▶ LEED® for Buildings Certification = green new building

▶▶ Deep Energy Retrofit (company reported) = energy efficient and high performance existing home
or building

Data Assumptions and Collection Barriers

Each year the study’s results become more valid as more program data, more address-level data and better quality data is
provided and analyzed. NCBPA believes that the data included in the report accurately represents many aspects of North
Carolina’s energy efficient, green and high performance construction market. However, assumptions are made during the
data normalization, analysis and reporting processes to address collection barriers. Key data assumptions and collection
barriers include:

▶▶ Address-level data is not available for all homes rated in the state. Accordingly, NCBPA collects data
directly from rating companies and Providers and adds data without an exact address, city, score or
date to each year to match the annual totals that RESNET® reports for years 2013 to 2016.

▶▶ Duplicate homes and buildings are known to be included in the data set but cannot be identified
where addresses are not provided. NCBPA removes duplicates where they can be clearly identified.

▶▶ Buildings (all types of non-residential) reported without a data point for individual units (e.g.
apartments or condos) are counted as one building. Buildings reported with data points for individual
units are counted as multi-family residential units.

▶▶ Saturation maps are each on different scales.

2
See Table 1 on page 10 for a full list of these programs.
◀ 9 ▶
 Programs and Rating Systems
NCBPA received valid data from 48 companies and organizations working with or administering 20 of the 42 distinct
programs available for use in North Carolina. Table 1 identifies which of the 42 programs provided data for the study.

TABLE 1
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR PROGRAM DATA PROVIDED?
Above and Beyond Energy High Performance Home Program Yes
Advanced Energy SystemVision™ (existing) Yes
SystemVision™ (new) Yes
ASHRAE ASHRAE Building and Energy Code Standards No
ASHRAE Building Energy Quotient® (bEQ) No
Department of Energy Better Buildings® Challenge No
DOE Zero Energy Ready Home No
Home Energy Score (HES) No
Duke Energy Progress Residential New Construction Program Yes
Home Energy House Call Yes
EarthCraft EarthCraft Building No
EarthCraft House No
EcoStructure Energy Consulting EcoStructure Certification Yes
Enterprise Enterprise Green Communities No
Environmental Protection Agency ENERGY STAR® 2.0 for Multifamily Buildings Yes
ENERGY STAR® Buildings and Plants Yes
ENERGY STAR® Certified New Homes Yes
Home Performance with ENERGY STAR® Yes
Foundation for Senior Living Home Energy Solutions No
Green Building Initiative Green Globes® No
Green Built Alliance (formerly WNCGBC) Green Gauge No
Green Built NC® Yes
Green Business Certification Inc. Arc Rating No
Green Plus Green Plus Certification No
Home Innovation Research Labs™ Multifamily National Green Building Standard™ Certification Yes
Single-Family NGBS Certification Yes
Remodeling NGBS Certification No
Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety FORTIFIED Home™ No
International Living Future Institute™ Living Building Certification No
Net Zero Energy Building Certification No
Petal Certification No
International Well Building Institute WELL Building Standard™ No
North Carolina Department of Insurance North Carolina HERO/Stretch Energy Code Yes
Passive House Institute PHIUS + Certification Yes
Pearl Certification Pearl Certification No
RESNET® Home Energy Rating System (HERS®) No
HERS® H20 No
Southern Energy Management ecoSelect™ Yes
TopBuild Home Services Environments for Living® Yes
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED® for Building Design & Construction Yes
LEED® for Building Operations & Maintenance Yes
LEED® for Homes Yes
◀ 10 ▶
◀ 10 ▶
 2017
INVENTORY
RESULTS

◀ 11 ▶
Total Quantity
34,152 energy efficient, green and high performance home and building units were identified in 2016. This is a slight
decrease from 34,628 units in 2015 but shows a 15% increase over 2014. In total, the study has identified 198,525 units
built or retrofitted since 2007.

GRAPH 1
Total Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year
40,000

35,000
34,027 34,628 34,152
30,000
29,483
25,000
24,402
20,000
18,167
15,000

10,000
10,807
5,000 6,899
5,300
0
660
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

In prior years, the study knowingly incorporated (and stated in the report) some duplicate data in new construction
residential due to a lack of available address-level data that would allow for the identification and removal of duplicate
units. For this study, NCBPA changed its process to ensure that the total number of HERS® Index Scores reported for
years 2013 to 2016 matches RESNET’s publicly available annual figures for North Carolina. In November of 2017, NCBPA
reached agreement with RESNET® to obtain additional address-level data for use in the study, conditional on Providers
agreeing to it. In order to perform a full sale price analysis of high performance vs. code-built homes, it would be
necessary to have addresses for all HERS® Index Scores in the state, so that homes without them could then be used as
comparables.

Of the 34,152 units identified in 2016, just 293 (0.9%) are existing homes or buildings. Of the 198,525 units since 2007,
98.9% are new construction and 1.1% are existing construction. NCBPA believes the number of homes and buildings
retrofitted to these criteria is higher than the annual numbers reported and continues to seek out data sources to provide
evidence.
GRAPH 2
Total Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and New vs. Existing
40,000

35,000
33,172 34,406 33,859

30,000
29,181

25,000
24,173

20,000

18,051
15,000

10,000 10,754

5,000 6,880
5,279
651
19 53 116 302 222 293
0 9 21 229 855
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Existing New
◀ 12 ▶
Residential single family units continue to dominate the number of units collected in the study. In 2016, 28,667 units
were residential single family (83.9%), 5,145 were residential multifamily (15.1%) and 340 were commercial (1.0%).
2016 is the largest year for residential multifamily since 2007, showing continued growth since a recent low point in
2014. Since 2007, 171,075 of all units are residential single family (86.2%), 20,775 are residential multifamily (10.5%),
2,897 are commercial buildings (1.5%) and 3,778 are manufactured homes (1.9%). Of note, manufactured home data
was not provided for the study in 2016 but was in prior years.

GRAPH 3
Total Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Building Type

40,000

35,000
30,026 30,828 28,667

30,000
27,459

25,000
20,569

20,000

12,571
15,000

10,000 8,873

5,000 6,361
5,145 4,568 5,145
1,165 3,087 2,885 1,196 2,452
576 3 274 416 711 365 748 600 938
0 84 152 264 353 317 381 368 228 410 340
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Commercial Building Manufactured Home Residential Multi Family Residential Single Family

Using available data from 2007 to 2016, NCBPA mapped the geographic saturation of energy efficient, green and high
performance units in the state. Graph 4 shows highest levels of saturation in four well-known markets for this type
of construction: Triangle, Charlotte Metro, Asheville and Wilmington. There are no significant changes in geographical
saturation for 2016. Greater detail on these metro areas and non-metro areas is provided later in this report.

GRAPH 4

Geographic Saturation Map of Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Homes and Buildings in North Carolina

◀ 13 ▶
Residential Homes
The report identifies 33,812 single family, multifamily and manufactured home units in 2016. This is a slight decrease
from 2015 but an increase from 2014. In total, 195,628 residential units have been built or retrofitted since 2007.

GRAPH 5
Residential Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year

40,000

35,000

33,659 34,218 33,812

30,000
29,255

25,000
24,021

20,000

17,850
15,000

10,000
10,454

5,000 6,635
5,148

0
576
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2016 data shows that 28,667 of residential units are for single family homes (84.8%) and 5,145 are for multifamily
units (15.2%). As noted earlier, manufactured home data was not provided for 2016. Since 2007, 171,075 of units are
residential single family (87.4%), 20,775 are multifamily (10.6%) and 3,778 are manufactured homes (1.9%).

GRAPH 6
Residential Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Building Type

40,000

35,000
30,026 30,828 28,667
30,000
27,459

25,000
20,569
20,000

12,571
15,000

10,000
8,873

5,000 6,361
5,145 4,568 5,145
1,165 3,087 2,885 1,196 2,452
576 274
3 416 711 365 748 600
0 938
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Manufactured Home Residential Multi Family Residential Single Family

◀ 14 ▶
125 existing residential units were identified in 2016, up from 79 in 2015. The 820 units identified in 2013 are the
result of federally-funded retrofit programs in place at the time. In total, new construction accounts for 193,813 of
all residential units in the state (99.2%). NCBPA believes that on an annual basis hundreds of existing units are not
accounted for in this data and will continue to improve the collection process to account for these units in future
iterations of the study.

GRAPH 7
Residential Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and New vs. Existing
40,000

35,000
32,839 34,139 33,687
30,000
28,985

25,000
23,827
20,000

17,787
15,000

10,000
10,452

5,000 6,634
5,148
194 820 270 125
1 2 63 79
0
576
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Existing New

Graph 8 shows a strong concentration of residential units in the Charlotte, Triangle and Asheville markets. In 2016, the
Charlotte market finished first with 10,767 units (31.5%) followed closely by the Triangle market with 9,325 units (27.3%).
The Triad finished third with 1,935 units (5.7%). Since 2007, Charlotte places first with 71,650 units (36.1%), the Triangle
second with 70,355 units (35.4%) and Triad third with 13,661 units (6.9%). As indicated on the map, Asheville has a very
high (and likely the highest as a percentage of all units built or retrofitted) saturation of energy efficient, green and high
performance homes in a metro market.

GRAPH 8
Geographic Saturation Map of Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Single Family Homes in North Carolina

◀ 15 ▶
 Graph 9 details a very low volume of residential multifamily existing units collected in each year of the study. NCBPA
believes that there are hundreds more units that have not been collected as part of the study. This will be a focal point
for the 2018 study.

GRAPH 9
5,1
Residential Multifamily Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and New vs. Existing

6,000 4,568

5,000 5,101

4,568

4,000 3,086
2,883

3,000 2,452
3,086
2,883

2,452
2,000

1,165 1,195
1,000 1,165 1,195

3 11 2 1 4
0
274 3 274 2 1 44

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20

Existing New

Multifamily units do not follow the same geographic saturation pattern as single family homes or commercial
buildings in the state. As shown in Graph 10, multifamily units are spread out much more across the state and far less
concentrated in metro markets than single family homes.

GRAPH 10
Geographic Saturation Map of Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Multifamily Homes in North Carolina

◀ 16 ▶
Commercial Buildings
The results of the study show that high performance commercial construction decreased by 17% from 2015 to 2016,
though 2016 volume is similar to previous levels from 2010 – 2013. 2014 was the lowest year since 2008 according
to data collected. Since 2007, 2,897 buildings have been built or retrofitted in the state. This inventory includes office
buildings, public buildings, institutional buildings, hospitals and many other types.

GRAPH 11
Commercial Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Buildings by Year
450

400
410
350 381
368
353
340
300 317

250 264
200 228

150
152
100

84
50

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

The majority of LEED® data provided does not include a building type field, causing a large portion of data in the chart
below to be shown as “Blank”. In contrast, ENERGY STAR® data included the building type field. NCBPA will work with
all providers to obtain this data in next year’s report and will consolidate categories to better report on general building
types (“office building” vs. “corporate”, for example).

For 2016 where building type is available (excluding blanks there are 165 building types listed), office buildings lead
the way with 84 (50.1%), followed by grocery stores with 51 (30.9%) and retail stores with 13 (7.8%). Since 2007 where
building type is available (excluding blanks there are 957 building types listed), “office” and “corporate” buildings
combined account for 378 (39.5%) of all buildings followed by grocery stores at 107 (11.1%) and “Higher Ed” at 94 (9.8%).

GRAPH 12
Commercial Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Buildings by Year and Building Type

450

400 450
223 (blank)
350 400 279 Warehouse and Storage
235 223
266 279 Supermarket/Grocery Store
350 235 175
300 214 266 State Government
175
300 214 Retail Store
250 198 Office
250 198 Non-Profit
200 158
158 Multifamily Housing
200
56 Local Government
150 56
51 51
120 150 K-12 School
120
100 25 25
Investor
100
73 13 13 Higher Ed
73 84 84
72 72 Financial Office
50 50
Federal Government
0 0 Distribution Center
2007 2008 2009
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2010 2011
2012 2012
2013 2013
2014 2014
2015 2015
20162016

◀ 17 ▶
 2016 continued a trend first seen in 2015 where commercial building retrofits increased significantly as a percentage of
all commercial energy efficient, green and high performance buildings. While the total number of buildings decreased
in 2016, as did those for new construction, existing buildings increased and the total number of commercial buildings
trended with years 2010 – 2013. As shown in Graph 13, 2014 was a down year for commercial buildings but the market
rebounded in 2015, the strongest year in the study. The percentage of existing to new buildings has increased from 14%
in 2014 to 35% in 2015 and 49% in 2016 while the quantity has increased from 32 in 2014 to 143 in 2015 and 168 in 2016.

GRAPH 13
Commercial Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Buildings by Year and New vs. Existing

450

267
400 267
346
333346
350 302 333
302 172
172
264
300 264

246
250 246
New
196 196
200 Existing

150 168
131 168
131 143
143
100

75
50
51 53
35 35 32
0
51 21 1853
9 35 352012
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201332 2014 2015 2016
21 18
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

The Charlotte market led 2016 reporting with 123 (36.2%) buildings, followed by the Triangle market with 104 (30.6%)
and the Triad with 29 (8.6%). Since 2017, Charlotte leads with 945 (32.6%) buildings followed by the Triangle with 685
(23.6%) and the Triad with 302 (10.4%).

GRAPH 14
Geographic Saturation Map of Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Commercial Buildings in North Carolina

◀ 18 ▶
Certification and Rating Programs
NCBPA attempted to collect data from 42 distinct certification and rating programs available for residential and
commercial energy efficient, green and high performance construction in the state. The majority of the 42 programs,
while available in the state, are not used. Of the active and available programs, NCBPA was able to collect data from 14
general programs. For presentation here in Table 2, new vs. existing and other sub-certification categories or versions of
programs are combined. The data contained in the following graphs applies only to these programs.

TABLE 2
Certification and Rating Programs Used in this Study

1. Duke Energy Progress Residential New Construction Program

2. ecoSelectTM
3. ENERGY STAR® Certified Buildings
4. ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes
5. ENERGY STAR® Manufacturing Plant Certified
6. Green Built NC®
7. HERS®Index Score
8. Home Performance with ENERGY STAR®
9. LEED® for Buildings
10. LEED® for Homes
11. National Green Building StandardTM
12. Passive House Institute US
13. Progress Energy Home Advantage Certification Program
14. SystemVisionTM

Note: Due to the fact that ENERGY STAR® certifications are based on HERS® Index Scores, the data should reflect a 1 to 1
relationship in the following graphs where both HERS® Index Scores and ENERGY STAR® certifications are present. However,
several instances illustrate this is not the case. This discrepancy is caused by a lack of address-level data which leads to
greater numbers of ENERGY STAR® certifications than HERS® Index Scores in some of the following graphs.

◀ 19 ▶
Of the data collected in the study, 2016 results show that HERS® Index Scores are the most frequently-used program
with 15,568 units (45.6%), followed by 9,581 units (28.1%) for ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes, 3,790 units (11.1%) for
Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program and 3,646 units (10.7%) for the National Green Building
StandardTM program. A HERS® Index Score is created in each of these programs.

GRAPH 15
Total Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program
40,000

35,000 SystemVision
Progress Energy HAC Program
30,000 Passive House Institute US
National Green Building Standard
LEED for Homes
25,000
LEED for Buildings
Home Performance with ENERGY STAR
20,000
HERS Index Score
Green Built NC
15,000 ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
10,000 ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
ecoSelect
5,000 Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
Company Verified

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Since 2007, the ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes program leads the way with 82,515 units (41.6%) and is followed by
HERS® Index Score with 64,435 units (32.5%), National Green Building StandardTM with 12,463 units (6.3%) and Duke
Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program with 9,677 units (4.9%). It is worth noting that North Carolina
had the second most HERS® Index Scores of any state in 2016.

GRAPH 16
Total Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Program and Year

90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000 2016
40,000 2015
30,000 2014
20,000 2013
10,000 2012
0 2011
2010
2009
2008
2007

◀ 20 ▶
Metro Areas
The following section defines North Carolina’s metro areas as cities and counties located in or near Asheville, Charlotte,
Triad, Triangle and Wilmington.

Graph 17 shows a clear annual upward trend in the total number of energy efficient, green and high performance
units being built or retrofitted in these markets from 2007 to its peak in 2014. 2015 decreased slightly but 2016 saw
a dramatic decrease of 11,072 units or 31.5% of the 2015 total. This sharp decline may signal a transition away from
volume certifications, verifications and ratings in metro areas to more suburban and rural cities and counties. The
decline is more likely the result of a lack of address-level data that was not able to be attributed to metro or non-metro
areas. Accordingly, the 2016 data point in particular should be interpreted with some caution. Since 2007, 176,013
(88.7%) of all North Carolina units are attributable to these metro areas.

GRAPH 17
Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year
40,000

35,000
35,464 35,182

30,000 30,809

25,000
24,110
20,000
19,815

15,000

13,372
10,000

8,216
5,000
4,609
3,894
0
542
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Residential single family continues to lead new and retrofitted units in the metro areas. However, 2016 saw an 80%
increase in the number of multifamily units reported through the study. Manufactured homes and commercial buildings
remain a very low percentage of the total. Since 2007, residential single family homes account for 88.4% of all metro
area units while residential multifamily accounts for 9.5% and commercial buildings account for 1.2%.

GRAPH 18
Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Building Type

40,000
35,000
1,153 2,452
30,000 33,865 31,956
2,610
25,000
27,660
4,432
20,000
2,539 19,402
15,000 16,907
10,000 2,718
630 10,156
5,000 241 7,152
3,770
479 2 4,168 158 279 112 300 283 456
0 63 122 200 276 219 257 239 163 318 276
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Commercial Building Manufactured Home Residential Single Family Residential Multifamily
◀ 21 ▶
The number of new construction units continues to outpace existing units year over year. Since 2007, 98.9% of all units
reported in the study are new construction.

GRAPH 19
Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and New vs. Existing
40,000

35,000
35,174 35,030

30,000 30,010

25,000
23,891
20,000
19,591

15,000

13,274
10,000

8,165
5,000
3,877 4,592
534
0 8 17 51 98 224 290 152 219
17 799
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Existing New

For these metro areas in 2016, the most widely-used programs include ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes with 8,983 units
(37.2%), HERS® Index Scores with 6,684 units (27.7%), National Green Building StandardTM with 3,629 units (15.1%) and
Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program with 3,479 units (14.4%). Since 2007, the most widely-
used programs include ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes with 71,991 units (40.1%), HERS® Index Scores with 63,610
units (36.1%), National Green Building StandardTM with 12,058 units (6.9%) and Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New
Construction Program with 9,031 units (5.1%).

GRAPH 20
Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program

40,000

SystemVision
35,000
Progress Energy HAC Program
Passive House Institute US
30,000
National Green Building Standard
LEED for Homes
25,000
LEED for Buildings
Home Performance with ENERGY STAR
20,000
HERS Index Score
Green Built NC
15,000
ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
10,000
ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
ecoSelect
5,000
Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
Company Verified
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

◀ 22 ▶
Asheville Metro
Available data for the Asheville market in 2016 shows that Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program
led the way with 324 units (38.1%) followed by HERS® Index Scores with 182 units (21.4%) and ENERGY STAR® Certified
Homes with 154 units (18.1%). Since 2007, HERS® Index Scores lead with 3,700 units (38.2%) followed by ENERGY
STAR® Certified Homes with 2,345 units (24.2%), Green Built NC® with 996 units (10.3%) and Duke Energy Progress’
Residential New Construction Program with 885 units (9.1%).

GRAPH 21
2,000
Asheville Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program
1,800
SystemVision
1,600 Progress Energy HAC Program
National Green Building Standard
1,400
LEED for Homes
1,200 LEED for Buildings
HERS Index Score
1,000
Green Built NC
800 ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
600 ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
ecoSelect
400
Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
200 Company Verified

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Charlotte Metro
Available data for the Charlotte market in 2016 shows that ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes led the way with 6,336 units
(58.9%) followed by the National Green Building StandardTM with 2,058 units (19.1%) and HERS® Index Scores with
2,044 units (19.0%). Since 2007, ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes leads with 37,236 units (52.0%), followed by HERS®
Index Scores with 26,418 units (36.9%) and National Green Building StandardTM with 5,006 units (7.0%).

18,000

16,000
GRAPH 22
SystemVision
14,000
Charlotte Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program
National Green Building Standard
LEED for Homes
12,000
LEED for Buildings
10,000 Home Performance with ENERGY STAR
HERS Index Score
8,000 Green Built NC
ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
6,000 ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
4,000
ecoSelect

2,000 Company Verified

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

◀ 23 ▶
Triad Metro
Available data for the Triad market in 2016 shows that HERS® Index Scores led the way with 991 units (51.2%) followed
by the ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes with 717 units (37.1%) and the National Green Building StandardTM with 130 units
(6.7%). Since 2007, ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes leads with 4,220 units (30.9%), followed by HERS® Index Scores with
5,157 units (37.7%) and National Green Building StandardTM with 1,191 units (8.7%).

GRAPH 23
Triad Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program
2,500

SystemVision
2,000 National Green Building Standard
LEED for Homes
LEED for Buildings
1,500 Home Performance with ENERGY STAR
HERS Index Score
Green Built NC
1,000 ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
ecoSelect
500
Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
Company Verified

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Triangle Metro
Available data for the Triangle market in 2016 shows that Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program
led the way with 2,941 units (31.5%) followed HERS® Index Scores with 2,582 units (32.0%) and ENERGY STAR®
Certified Homes with 1,682 units (18.0%). Since 2007, ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes leads with 26,641 units (37.8%)
followed by HERS® Indes Scores with 22,496 units (32.0%) and Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction
Program with 7,554 units (10.7%).

GRAPH 24
Triangle Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program

18,000

SystemVision
16,000
Progress Energy HAC Program
14,000 Passive House Institute US
National Green Building Standard
12,000 LEED for Homes
LEED for Buildings
10,000 Home Performance with ENERGY STAR
HERS Index Score
8,000
Green Built NC

6,000 ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified

ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
4,000 ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
ecoSelect
2,000 Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
Company Verified
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

◀ 24 ▶
Wilmington Metro
Available data for the Wilmington market in 2016 shows that HERS® Index Scores led the way with 672 units (65.9%)
followed by Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program with 213 units (20.9%) and ENERGY STAR®
Certified Homes with 94 units (9.2%). Since 2007, HERS® Index Scores lead with 5,590 units (53.7%) followed by ENERGY
STAR® Certified Homes with 1,549 units (14.9%) and Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program with
587 units (5.6%).

GRAPH 25
Wilmington Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program

3,000

2,500 SystemVision
Passive House Institute US
National Green Building Standard
2,000
LEED for Homes
LEED for Buildings
1,500 HERS Index Score
ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
1,000 ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
ecoSelect
Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
500
Company Verified

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Minor Metro Areas

The following section defines North Carolina’s minor metro areas as cities and counties located in or near Greenville,
Jacksonville and Fayetteville. Illustrated in Graph 26, the volume of energy efficient, green and high performance units
has been decreasing steadily over the past four years with 2016 being the lowest year since 2008. The decline may be
the result of a lack of address-level data that was not able to be attributed to metro or non-metro areas. Accordingly,
the 2016 data point in particular should be interpreted with some caution. Since 2007, 17,021 of all North Carolina units
(8.6%) are attributable to these minor metro areas.

GRAPH 26

Minor Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year

3,500

3,000
2,908 2,820
2,500 2,661
2,375
2,000

1,500 1,695
1,504 1,489
1,000
904
500 647

0 18
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
◀ 25 ▶
According to the data available in the study, residential single family units have continued a decline since 2013, as has
residential multifamily units, though they rebounded slightly in 2016.

GRAPH 27
Minor Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Building Type

3,500

3,000
1,387 192
2,500 284 2,516
2,298 2,272
2,000

1,500 1,560
1,497 347 1,408
1,000 1,076
1
897
500 125
87 71 107 495
12 51 49 64
0 6 6 7 15 26 30 48 32 28 27
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Commercial Building Manufactured Home Residential Single Family Residential Multifamily

Very few existing units have been reported in any year, though there is an increase from zero in 2012 to 18 in 2016 in
the data set.

GRAPH 28
Minor Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and New vs. Existing

3,500
3,000
2,500 2,903 2,819
2,661
2,000 2,373

1,500 1,679
1,504 1,489
1,000
500 904
629
18 5 1 2 16
0 18
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Existing New

◀ 26 ▶
HERS® Index Score is the leading program in these areas though 2016 saw a sharp decline compared to prior years.
ENERGY STAR® remains as the second most frequently-used program.

GRAPH 29
Minor Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program

3,500
SystemVision
3,000
National Green Building Standard
2,500

2,000 LEED for Homes

1,500 LEED for Buildings

1,000
HERS Index Score
500
ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant
0 Certified
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Non-Metro Areas
This section reports on all data collected in the study where a city or county was provided that is not attributable to a
metro or minor metro-area. It excludes data points where no city or county was provided (“blanks”). Illustrated in Graph
30, data collected for non-metro areas shows a similar trend found in metro and minor-metro areas of decreasing units
in 2015 and 2016.

GRAPH 30
Non-Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year

3,000

2,794 2,744
2,500 2,612

2,000
1,887 1,927
1,500
1,488
1,000 1,102
786
500
502
0 100
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

◀ 27 ▶
Residential single family units experienced a large drop-off in 2016, whereas residential multifamily increased due to
one or a few projects in rural areas. Manufactured home data, though not available for 2016, is a higher percentage of
the total units reported in non-metro areas than in metro or minor metro areas.

GRAPH 31
Non-Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Building Type

3,000

2,500 43 2,333
83 2,472
2,064
2,000
463 264
1,500 1,365
1,007 588
1,000 188
33
645 882
500 696
478 345 204 384 375
207 246
85
0 15 24 57 62 72 94 81 33 36 18
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Commercial Building Manufactured Home Residential Single Family Residential Multifamily

Similar to the minor metro areas, there are very few existing units reported in the data set.

GRAPH 32
Non-Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and New vs. Existing
3,000 SEARCH PARTNER

2,500 2,784 2,707

2,557
2,000
1,874 1,922
1,500
1,451
1,000 1,100
500 784
498
99 55
0 4 13 10 37 37
1 2 2 5
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Existing New

◀ 28 ▶
 ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes and Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction program lead the way for units
in these areas. SystemVisionTM, an affordable housing energy efficiency program offered through Advanced Energy, ranks
fourth in 2016.

GRAPH 33

Non-Metro Area Energy Efficient, Green and High Performance Units by Year and Program
3,000
SystemVision
2,500 SystemVision
Progress
Progress Energy
EnergyHAC
HACProgram
Program
2,000 Passive House Institute US
National Green
National Green Building
BuildingStandard
Standard
3,500
1,500 LEED for Homes
SystemVision
LEED for
for Buildings
Homes
3,000 LEED
1,000
Home Performance
National with Standard
Green Building ENERGY STAR
2,500 LEED for Buildings
HERS Index Score
500
2,000 Green Built
LEED for NC
Homes
Home Performance with ENERGY STAR
0 ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant Certified
1,500 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 LEED forSTAR
ENERGY Buildings
Certified Homes
ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings
1,000
HERS Index Score
ecoSelect

Conclusions and Key Findings

500 Duke Energy Progress RNC Program
ENERGY STAR Manufacturing Plant
Company Verified
0 Certified
2008 2009 2007 2010
2008 2009
2011 20102012 2011 2012
2013 2013
2014 201420152015 2016
2016

▶▶ 2016 results show that HERS® Index Scores are the most frequently-used program in the state with 15,568
units (45.6%), followed by 9,581 units (28.1%) for ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes, 3,790 units (11.1%) for
Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program and 3,646 units (10.7%) for the National Green
Building StandardTM program. A HERS® Index Score is created in each of these programs.

▶▶ Since 2007, ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes is the most frequently-used program in the state with 82,515
units (41.6%) and is followed by HERS® Index Score with 64,435 units (32.5%), National Green Building
StandardTM with 12,463 units (6.3%) and Duke Energy Progress’ Residential New Construction Program with
9,677 units (4.9%).

▶▶ From 2007 to 2014 there was an upward trend in the number of energy efficient, green and high performance
units being built or retrofitted in North Carolina’s metro markets. This upward trend ended in 2015 and
2016 saw a dramatic decrease of 11,072 units or 31.5% of the 2015 total. This sharp decline may signal a
transition away from volume certifications, verifications and ratings in metro areas to more suburban and
rural cities and counties. The decline is more likely the result of a lack of address-level data that was not
able to be attributed to metro or non-metro areas. Since 2007, 176,013 of all North Carolina units are
attributable to the Asheville, Charlotte, Triad, Triangle and Wilmington metro areas (88.7%).

▶▶ The volume of energy efficient, green and high performance units has been decreasing steadily over the past
four years in the minor-metro areas of Fayetteville, Greenville and Jacksonville with 2016 being the lowest
year since 2008.

▶▶ Following several consecutive years of strong growth of units in non-metro areas, 2015 saw a decline and
2016 showed a significant decrease.

◀ 29 ▶
 AUTHORED BY

2017 NORTH CAROLINA

HIGH PERFORMANCE HOME
SALE PRICE ANALYSIS
Findings from the sales of 3,908 high performance homes in
North Carolina’s Charlotte, Triad and Triangle metro markets

RESEARCH PARTNER

◀ 30 ▶
Overview
Over the past several years, industry stakeholders have performed studies across the country that quantify the financial
return of energy efficient, green and high performance homes. These studies provide measurable evidence that high
performance homes can sell faster, at a higher price and retain value greater than an average home. Studies have found:

▶▶ New green certified homes sold for 12.9% more ($13.82 per sq ft more) and 42 days faster than non-
certified homes (Argeris, 2012).

▶▶ ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes sold at a $5,566 premium ($2.99 per sq ft more) and 89 days faster
than homes without an ENERGY STAR® certification (NC Energy Efficiency Alliance, 2011)

▶▶ On average, houses that exhibit one or more green elements sell for 5.9% more than a similar house
without any green elements (The Appraisal Journal, 2015).

▶▶ Attic insulation provides the highest return on investment, 116.9%, of all home improvement projects
studied (Remodeling Report, 2016).

In 2017 North Carolina Building Performance Association (NCBPA) performed an analysis of the sale prices of homes
that have energy efficiency, green or high performance certifications and ratings in the state’s three largest construction
markets: Charlotte, Triad and Triangle. To perform the study, NCBPA was provided with sale price data from MetroStudy
via deed closing transactions that occured in 2015 and 2016. The transactions include new, custom and existing home
sales. NCBPA analyzed the sale prices, cost per square foot and total dollars spent, of 42,458 homes sold during 2015
and 2016.

Homes certified, verified or rated to the following programs were included in this analysis:

▶▶ ENERGY STAR® Certified Homes (ENERGY STAR®)

▶▶ Green Built NC®

▶▶ Home Energy Rating System (HERS®) Index Score

▶▶ Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) for Homes

▶▶ National Green Building Standard™ (NGBS)

For a full listing of the 28 residential and 14 commercial energy efficiency, green and high performance building
programs available in North Carolina in 2016, refer to Table 1 in the full report.

Download the report at www.BuildingNC.org.

◀ 31 ▶
Cities and Counties
Cities and counties attributed to the metro areas in the study follow the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) standards
provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. The map shows an approximation of counties included in the
three metro areas.

Charlotte Metro Triad Metro Triangle Metro

Individual cities where home sales were included in the analysis:

▶▶ Charlotte: Belmont, Charlotte, China Grove, Concord, Cornelius, Cramerton, Davidson, Denver, Gastonia,
Harrisburg, Huntersville, Indian Trail, Kannapolis, Locust, Marvin, Matthews, McAdenville, Midland,
Mint Hill, Monroe, Mooresville, Mount Holly, Pineville, Stallings, Stanley, Statesville, Troutman,
Waxhaw, Weddington, Wesley Chapel

▶▶ Triad: Advance, Browns Summit, Burlington, Clemmons, Colfax, Elon, Gibsonville, Graham, Greensboro,
Haw River, High Point, Jamestown, Kernersville, King, Lewisville, Lexington, McLeansville, Mebane, Oak
Ridge, Pfafftown, Reidsville, Rural Hall, Stokesdale, Summerfield, Thomasville, Walkertown, Whitsett,
Winston-Salem

▶▶ Triangle: Angier, Apex, Benson, Cary, Chapel Hill, Clayton, Durham, Four Oaks, Franklinton, Fuquay-
Varina, Garner, Hillsborough, Holly Springs, Knightdale, Louisburg, Morrisville, Pittsboro, Raleigh,
Rolesville, Smithfield, Wake Forest, Wendell, Willow Spring, Youngsville, Zebulon

◀ 32 ▶
. Assumptions and Methodology
▶▶ NCBPA attributes the value of energy efficiency, green and high performance certifications and ratings
to increased sale prices as correlation only, not causation. A variety of other factors, such as kitchen
upgrades and lot size that impact the sale price of a home are not included in this analysis.

▶▶ Homes were considered to meet energy efficient, green and/or high performance standards if they
were certified or rated to one or more of the 28 residential programs and rating systems available in
the state. Of the 42,458 homes studied, 3,908 met the high performance criteria.

▶▶ To ensure validity and avoid skewed results, NCBPA recursively removed duplicate and non-address-
specific data.

▶▶ Homes certified or rated to multiple programs are reported independently. A single home with both
a HERS® Index Score and an ENERGY STAR® certification is included in the pricing analysis for each
program.

▶▶ The linear regression graphs shown in the results section were produced using Microsoft Excel. Linear
trendlines were used and displayed on each graph with R2 values for clarity.

▶▶ NCBPA was unable to distinguish between a reported HERS® Index Score of zero and a zero used
to indicate that no HERS® Index Score was given; therefore, HERS® Index Scores of zero were not
included in this analysis.

▶▶ The majority of high performance home certification and rating data used in this study is only
available electronically from 2012 forward; therefore, homes sold in 2015 to 2016 with a certification
or rating performed prior to 2012 are excluded from this analysis.

▶▶ Green Built NC®, a green home certification program used almost exclusively in the Asheville region,
is not active in the Triad or Triangle markets.

◀ 33 ▶
Findings
Certification Programs and Rating Systems
Graph 34 illustrates that homes certified to ENERGY STAR® have the highest sale price, $364,672, across the three metro
areas combined. Those built to NGBS have the second highest sale price, $357,414, HERS® Index Score is third highest,
$330,090, followed by LEED® and Green Built NC®.
GRAPH 34
Average Sale Price by Program for 2015 - 2016 Home Sales
$400,060
$364,672 $357,414
$350,060 $330,090

$300,060

$250,060
$210,894
$200,060

$150,060
$111,050
$100,060

$50,060

$60
Green Built NC HERS Index Score ENERGY STAR LEED for Homes National Green
Certified Homes Building Standard
Graph 35 illustrates that NGBS has the highest sale price per square foot, $143.44, across the three metro areas combined.
LEED® has the second highest sale price per square foot, $116.68, ENERGY STAR® is third highest, $116.42, followed by
HERS® Index Score and Green Built NC®.

It is important to note that the price per square foot data for LEED® was likely impacted by the large portion of low-income
homes in the sample set from the Charlotte market. Programs like Habitat for Humanity achieve high performance standards
but have a much lower sale price to allow for affordable housing. Additionally, Green Built NC® is primarily a regional
program in Western North Carolina and only had 12 home sales within the metro regions used in this study.

GRAPH 35
Average Sale Price per Square Foot by Program for 2015 - 2016 Home Sales
$150 $143.44
$140
$130
$120 $114.48 $116.42 $116.68

$110
$100
$89.71
$90
$80
$70
$60
Green Built NC HERS Index Score ENERGY STAR LEED for Homes National Green
Certified Homes Building Standard
◀ 34 ▶
High Performance Home Sale Prices and Square Footage vs. All Home Homes
Table 3 compares the average square footage, sale price and price per square foot of the 3,908 (9.2%) confirmed high
performance homes to the average of the total number of all metro home sales, 42,458, in 2015 to 2016. During reviews
of this data with local builders and Realtors®, it was determined that the consistent increase in square footage and sale
price for high performance homes would likely be even larger if comparing to only non-high performance home sales.
The percent increase or decrease of high performance homes versus all homes is shown in blue below each value in the
high performance home column.

In summary:

▶▶ On average, high performance homes in the Triangle market are 2,962 square feet and 14.4% larger in size than
the average home in the market.

▶▶ High performance homes in the Charlotte market are the smallest, with square footage increases of 5.6%,
compared to homes in the Triangle and Triad markets.

▶▶ High performance homes in the Triangle market have the highest average sale price, $400,989, of each of the
metro areas, a 22.0% increase over all homes in the metro areas.

▶▶ Combined, high performance homes in all metro areas have an average sale price of $339,210, a 9.5% increase
over all homes.

▶▶ The Triangle market has the largest increase in average price median, 32.0%, of any of the metro areas.

TABLE 3
Average Sale Price and Square Footage for 2015 - 2016 Home Sales by Metro Area
Charlotte Triad Triangle All Metro Areas
High Performance High Performance High Performance High Performance
All Homes All Homes All Homes All Homes
Homes Homes Homes Homes

Square Footage 2,946 2,626 2,962 2,908

Average
2,789 2,340 2,590 2,652
5.6% 12.2% 14.4% 9.6%

Square Footage
Range
768 - 6,197 714 – 8,683 1,120 - 5,707 348 – 7,021 1,117 - 6,038 650 – 12,225 768 - 6,197 348 – 12,225

Square Footage 2,961 2,617 2,870 2,892

Median
2,723 2,244 2,482 2,558
8.7% 16.6% 15.6% 13.1%

$325,021 $237,803 $400,989 $339,210

Price Average $316,190 $224,057 $328,723 $309,845
2.8% 6.1% 22.0% 9.5%

$65,000 - $42,100 - $82,000 - $41,000 - $110,000 - $45,000 - $65,000 - $41,000 -

Price Range
$1,539,500 $2,680,600 $731,000 $1,050,000 $1,212,000 $2,148,500 $1,539,500 $2,680,600

$315,500 $219,500 $388,000 $322,000

Price Median $289,125 $194,250 $294,000 $280,000
9.1% 13.0% 32.0% 15.0%

Price per Square $109.22 $89.68 $135.25 $115.43

Foot Average
$113.07 $93.74 $126.71 $116.82
-3.4% - 4.3% 6.7% - 1.2%

Price per Square $32.83 - $15.38 - $41.06 - $13.76 - $63.06 - $15.23 - $32.83 - $13.76 -
Foot Range $427.91 $1,332.39 $202.42 $334.22 $252.53 $1,342.79 $427.91 $1,342.79

Price per Square $107.98 $83.40 $136.01 $110.54

Foot Median
$106.47 $87.40 $121.31 $106.67
1.4% - 4.6% 12.1% 3.6%

◀ 35 ▶
Sale Price and Square Footage by Metro Area and Program Over Time
Graph 36 illustrates average sale price per square foot by metro area for the 3,908 high performance homes. The Triad
peaked in 2015 at $98.23 per square foot. The Triangle consistently has the highest average sale price of the three
markets and increased in each quarter during 2016. The Charlotte market has remained relatively flat over the two year
period with a slight increase in 2016.

GRAPH 36
2015 - 2016 Average Sale Price per Square Foot by NC Metro Area
$150
$141.04
$139.14 $139.44
$140 $135.92
$133.50 $134.59
$128.93 $128.28
$130

$120 Charlotte Metro

$112.87 $112.27
$109.68 $110.03
$108.22
$110 $105.04 $105.28 Triad Metro
$100.22
$98.23
$100
$94.65
$92.37 $91.90
$90.02 Triangle Metro
$87.57 $87.98
$90 $85.27

$80
Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4
2015 2016

Graph 37 illustrates average sale price per square foot by program for the 3,908 high performance homes. NGBS carries
the highest average of all programs over the two year period. ENERGY STAR® and HERS® Index Score show relatively
consistent averages across the two year period, indicating consistent market recognition and usage of these programs.
LEED® averages decrease sharply at the start of 2015 and decline steadily over 2016. As mentioned earlier, most LEED®
homes in this study are from low-income housing programs. Green Built NC® shows sporadic data over time because
only 12 home sales are included over the two year period.

GRAPH 37
2015 - 2016 Average Sales Price per Square Foot by Program

$180
$163.90
$157.43 $154.86 Green Built
$160 $149.86
$147.34
$140.09 $143.36
$140 $131.73 $129.79 LEED®
$122.91 $122.40 $118.07 $114.37
$118.37 $116.08 $119.18 $118.52 $116.03
$120 $113.61 $115.02
$111.69 $114.40 $113.59 $113.58
$108.00 $110.80 HERS®
$102.11 $101.03 $99.12
$100 $93.30 $93.06 $91.02 $90.13
$90.11 $86.51
$89.22 ENERGY STAR®
$80
NGBS
$60
$43.53
$40
Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4
2015 2016

◀ 36 ▶
Sale Price and Square Footage by Program by Metro Area
Graphs 38 and 39 provide more detailed information by incorporating program data, where available.
▶▶ NGBS and LEED®, well-known, national, green building certification progams, both show dramatic differences in
the average sale price of certified homes in the two markets represented.
▶▶ NGBS showed no home sales in the Charlotte market data set.
▶▶ ENERGY STAR® and HERS® Index Scores, the two most commonly-used programs in the state, achieve higher
values in each market.
GRAPH 38
Average Sale Price by Program in Metro Areas During 2015 - 2016
$450,060
$413,289
$398,677 $388,417 $393,012
$400,060 $366,282
$350,060
$301,000
$300,060
$245,030
$250,060
$211,906
$200,060
$150,060
$111,050 $104,380 $103,143
$100,060
$50,060
$60
Green Built NC HERS Index Score ENERGY STAR LEED for Homes National Green
Certified Homes Building Standard

Charlotte Metro Triad Metro Triangle Metro

▶▶ LEED® certified homes in the Triangle market have the highest average sale price per square foot in the study.
▶▶ NGBS certified homes in the Triad and Triangle markets show vast differences in price per square foot, presumably
due to local market conditions.
▶▶ Both ENERGY STAR® and HERS® Index Scores are popular in all three markets, with the Triangle having the
highest average sale price per square foot in all markets.
GRAPH 39
Average Sale Price per Square Foot by Program in Metro Areas
$180
$163.94
$160 $151.87

$140 $134.83 $132.12

$120 $115.32
$105.35
$100 $91.04
$89.71 $88.33
$83.23 $83.26
$80

$60
Green Built NC HERS Index Score ENERGY STAR Certified LEED for Homes National Green
Homes Building Standard

Charlotte Metro Triad Metro Triangle Metro

◀ 37 ▶
Sale Price and Square Footage by HERS® Index Score Range by Metro Area
Table 4 presents an analysis of HERS® Index Score ranges to average sale prices and average square footage per metro
area. HERS® Index Scores are the foundation of many programs used in North Carolina and are used in this analysis to
compare sale prices and sqaure footage by a common high performance metric. Only three homes scored below (better)
or above (worse) these ranges and were not included in this analysis.
In summary:
▶▶ There is strong correlation between lower HERS® Index Scores and higher total sale price and price per square
foot.

▶▶ The Charlotte market has the highest number of high performance home sales of all the metro areas (2,034 homes).

▶▶ Only 22 of the 3,829 home sales analyzed (0.6%) received a HERS® Index Score in the 40 - 49 range, and 40
received a HERS® Index Score in the 80 - 89 range.

▶▶ Of the homes analyzed, 2,091 have a HERS® Index Score between 60 - 69. This is the highest number of home
sales in a HERS® Index Score range in all of the metro areas combined.

TABLE 4
Sale Price and Square Footage by HERS® Index Score Range by Metro Area

HERS® Index
Score Range 40 – 49 50 – 59 60 – 69 70 – 79 80 - 89

$614,873 $517,384 $349,833 $255,230 $231,063

Charlotte 3,805 sq ft 3,775 sq ft 3,175 sq ft 2,409 sq ft 2,165 sq ft
2,034 homes $153.02 per sq ft $132.98 per sq ft $109.63 per sq ft $105.94 per sq ft $105.30 per sq ft
2 homes 73 homes 1,320 homes 623 homes 16 homes

$731,000 $450,650 $282,864 $218,786 $177,500

Triad
4,498 sq ft 3,384 sq ft 2,894 sq ft 2,558 sq ft 1,939 sq ft
506 homes
$162.52 per sq ft $130.25 per sq ft $96.42 per sq ft $85.89 per sq ft $92.54 per sq ft
1 home 10 homes 120 homes 360 homes 15 homes

$439,237 $465,188 $400,544 $321,915 $224,000

Triangle 2,811 sq ft 3,340 sq ft 3,028sq ft 2,425 sq ft 1,613 sq ft
1,289 homes $157.96 per sq ft $139.11 per sq ft $132.01 per sq ft $133.41 per sq ft $141.72 per sq ft
19 homes 348 homes 651 homes 262 homes 9 homes

$468,466 $473,691 $361,778 $258,725 $209,388

All Metro 2,978 sq ft 3,415 sq ft 3,114 sq ft 2,455 sq ft 1,956 sq ft
Areas $157.72 per sq ft $137.86 per sq ft $115.80 per sq ft $105.93 per sq ft $108.71 per sq ft
3,829 homes
22 homes 431 homes 2,091 homes 1,245 homes 40 homes

◀ 38 ▶
Average Sale Price per HERS® Index Score in 50 - 79 Range for All Metro Areas
Graphs 40 and 41 highlight the average sale price and price per square foot for homes sold in all metro areas that
fall within HERS® Index Score range of 50 to 79. These graphs illustrate how the sale price and price per square foot
generally decrease as HERS® Index Scores increase.

GRAPH 40
Average Sale Price per HERS® Index Score in 50 - 79 Range for All Metro Areas
$600,000
$568,250

$550,000

$501,288
$491,179 $493,582
$500,000 $479,724 $481,072
$468,475
$461,471 $457,850
$444,792
$450,000 $434,347
$425,325

$397,605
$400,000 $384,690
$367,970
$389,136
$350,000 $340,697
$332,378

$309,184
$332,376
$300,000 $281,637

$294,948 $254,020
$250,000 $237,695 $240,640
$270,433

$245,369 $211,065 $205,173

$200,000
$208,920

$150,000
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

GRAPH 41
Average Sale Price per Square Foot per HERS® Index Score in 50 - 79 Range for All Metro Areas
$150 $148.38 $148.69
$148.01
$145.03
$145 $143.58
$141.69
$140.21
$140
$137.04

$135 $132.66
$131.19
$129.95
$130
$127.23

$125

$119.61
$120 $119.04
$117.03
$115.83
$115
$111.16 $111.72
$110.89 $111.29
$110 $108.83 $107.82
$107.60 $107.63
$106.93
$103.71 $104.65 $105.06
$105 $103.84
$104.01
$100
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

◀ 39 ▶
Sale Price and Square Footage by HERS® Index Score Range by Metro Area
Graphs 42 - 49 illustrate the implicit values of HERS® Index Scores by metro market.

Graph 42: Sale Price vs. HERS®Index Score in All Metro Areas (3,829 Homes)
R-squared of ~28% (somewhat reliable)
▶▶ Average sale price: $339,889 ▶▶ Average HERS®: 66.85
▶▶ Median sale price: $321,500 ▶▶ Median HERS®: 67
$1,800,000

$1,600,000
y = -11907x + 1E+06
R² = 0.2829
$1,400,000

$1,200,000

$1,000,000

$800,000

$600,000

$400,000

$200,000

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

Graph 43: Sale Price per Square Foot vs. HERS® Index Score in All Metro Areas
R-squared of ~12% (not very reliable)
▶▶ Average sale price per square foot: $115.21 ▶▶ Median sale price per square foot: $110.53
$450

$400

$350
y = -1.6566x + 226
R² = 0.116
$300

$250

$200

$150

$100

$50

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

VALUE DEFINITIONS:

▶▶ Y = Formula for “Line of Best Fit”. Using this formula, it is possible to ▶▶ R-squared = Explained variation / Total variation. 0% (0.00)
indicates that the linear regression line explains none of the
calculate an assumed Y value (sale price) of a given X value (HERS®
variability of the data points shown around its mean. 100% (1.00)
Index Score) even if a data point is not collected or show on the
indicates that the line explains all the variability of the data points
chart.
shown around its mean. In general, the higher the R-squared, the
better the line represents the data.

◀ 40 ▶
 Graph 44: Sale Price vs. HERS®Index Score in Charlotte Metro (2,034 Homes)
R-squared of ~23% (somewhat reliable)
▶▶ Average sale price: $326,197 ▶▶ Average HERS®: 67.61
▶▶ Median sale price: $316,000 ▶▶ Median HERS®: 67

$1,800,000

$1,600,000

$1,400,000 y = -14,269.37x + 1,289,176.52

R² = 0.23
$1,200,000

$1,000,000

$800,000

$600,000

$400,000

$200,000

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

Graph 45: Sale Price per Square Foot vs. HERS® Index Score in Charlotte Metro
R-squared of ~3% (not reliable)

▶▶ Average sale price per square foot: $109.35 ▶▶ Median sale price per square foot: $108.35

$450

$400
y = -1.10x + 183.24
$350 R² = 0.03

$300

$250

$200

$150

$100

$50

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

VALUE DEFINITIONS:

▶▶ Y = Formula for “Line of Best Fit”. Using this formula, it is possible to ▶▶ R-squared = Explained variation / Total variation. 0% (0.00)
indicates that the linear regression line explains none of the
calculate an assumed Y value (sale price) of a given X value (HERS®
variability of the data points shown around its mean. 100% (1.00)
Index Score) even if a data point is not collected or show on the
indicates that the line explains all the variability of the data points
chart.
shown around its mean. In general, the higher the R-squared, the
better the line represents the data.

◀ 41 ▶
 Graph 46: Sale Price vs. HERS®Index Score in Triangle Metro (1,289 Homes)
R-squared of ~15% (somewhat reliable)

▶▶ Average sale price: $407,552 ▶▶ Average HERS®: 63.51

▶▶ Median sale price: $395,000 ▶▶ Median HERS®: 63
$1,400,000

$1,200,000
y = -7,640.48x + 894,484.66
R² = 0.15
$1,000,000

$800,000

$600,000

$400,000

$200,000

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

Graph 47: Sale Price per Square Foot vs. HERS® Index Score in Triangle Metro
R-squared of ~2% (not reliable)

▶▶ Average sale price per square foot: $152.99 ▶▶ Median sale price per square foot: $144.36

$300
y = -0.59x + 174.01
R² = 0.02
$250

$200

$150

$100

$50

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

VALUE DEFINITIONS:

▶▶ Y = Formula for “Line of Best Fit”. Using this formula, it is possible to ▶▶ R-squared = Explained variation / Total variation. 0% (0.00)
indicates that the linear regression line explains none of the
calculate an assumed Y value (sale price) of a given X value (HERS®
variability of the data points shown around its mean. 100% (1.00)
Index Score) even if a data point is not collected or show on the
indicates that the line explains all the variability of the data points
chart.
shown around its mean. In general, the higher the R-squared, the
better the line represents the data.

◀ 42 ▶
 Graph 48: Sale Price vs. HERS®Index Score in Triad Metro (506 Homes)
R-squared of ~22% (somewhat reliable)
▶▶ Average sale price: $238,353 ▶▶ Average HERS®: 71.53
▶▶ Median sale price: $220,500 ▶▶ Median HERS®: 73
$1,000,000
$900,000 y = -9350.6x + 909287
$800,000 R² = 0.2216

$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

Graph 49: Sale Price per Square Foot vs. HERS® Index Score in Triad Metro
R-squared of ~9% (not very reliable)

▶▶ Average sale price per square foot: $89.62 ▶▶ Median sale price per square foot: $83.70

$250
y = -1.2693x + 180.69
R² = 0.0863
$200

$150

$100

$50

$0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

VALUE DEFINITIONS:

▶▶ Y = Formula for “Line of Best Fit”. Using this formula, it is possible to ▶▶ R-squared = Explained variation / Total variation. 0% (0.00)
indicates that the linear regression line explains none of the
calculate an assumed Y value (sale price) of a given X value (HERS®
variability of the data points shown around its mean. 100% (1.00)
Index Score) even if a data point is not collected or show on the
indicates that the line explains all the variability of the data points
chart.
shown around its mean. In general, the higher the R-squared, the
better the line represents the data.

◀ 43 ▶
Conclusions and Key Findings
This analysis provides evidence that, on average, builders and owners of energy efficicient, green and high
performance homes in North Carolina’s Charlotte, Triad and Triangle metro areas receive higher sale prices than
other homes. Certification and rating programs including NGBS and the HERS® Index Score can serve as starting
points for quantifying this added value.

Key findings from the study include:

▶▶ NGBS certification has the highest sale price per square foot at $143.44, followed by LEED® at $116.68.

▶▶ Homes with ENERGY STAR® certifications and HERS® Index Scores hold comparable average sale prices in
each of the three metro markets, indicating strong market acceptance for each program.

▶▶ High performance homes average 4.3% more square footage and sell for 9.5% more across the three metro
areas combined.

▶▶ High performance homes in the Triangle market have the largest average size of the metro areas at 2,962
square feet, 14.4% larger than the average for all homes.

▶▶ High performance homes in the Triangle market have the highest average sale price of the metro areas at
$400,989, a 22.0% increase over all homes in all the metro areas at $328,723.

▶▶ NGBS homes sold at a higher price in the Triangle market than in the Triad market. LEED® homes sold at a
higher price in the Triangle market than in the Charlotte market. The variation in sales illustrate how the
value of energy and green certifications differ across local markets and various housing types.

▶▶ Most of the energy, green and high performance certification programs included in this study utilize HERS®
Index Scores as a compliance path. A HERS® Index Score is a potential starting point to obtaining higher sale
prices for high performance homes.

▶▶ NCBPA was unable to distinguish between a reported HERS® Index Score of zero and a zero used to indicate
that no HERS® Index Score was given; therefore HERS® Index Scores of zero were not included in this
analysis. The variation in the input of this MLS feature is an indicator that more education and understanding
of the HERS® Index and what a HERS® Index Score of zero means is needed among the residential building
industry.

▶▶ The average HERS® Index Score for homes included in the study was 67.82 compared to the state average of
66 in 2016 and 67 in 2015 (RESNET®).

◀ 44 ▶
 MARKET
DEVELOPMENT
NEEDS &
SOLUTIONS
NCBPA’s 2016 report concluded with a list of 20 market development needs and solutions that
can, and in some cases are, being used to grow North Carolina’s market for high performance
homes and buildings. This work led to NCBPA’s involvement in a variety of “Green MLS”
initiatives, primarily in the residential market, that have helped to further define market
barriers and opportunities. In the more than 12 months since the prior report was released,
NCBPA staff, members and partners have participated in a variety of local, state, regional and
national conferences, webinars and meetings on the topics included in this list.

This 2017 report concludes with these same 20 market development needs and solutions
with updates on what NCBPA and others have done and are doing to improve the market
in North Carolina. While the residential market is the primary focus for this 2017 report, the
commercial market will be highlighted in the 2018 report. Steps that industry companies and
advocates can take to improve their businesses and local markets are also included.
 S1 IMPROVE CONSUMER EDUCATION RESOURCES

Need:
Residential owners and operators need easily accessible, free and trustworthy resources that educate
them on how and why to participate in energy efficient, green and high performance construction.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA continues to expand its residential consumer education website
www.HomeEnergyNC.org that now includes information on renewable energy, energy
storage and green building. A frequently asked questions tab has been added to
address consumer questions on crawlspaces, energy audits, HVAC, insulation and
more. NCBPA is planning a re-release of the upgraded site in April of 2018 that will
include social media and consumer education campaigns across the state.

▶▶ NCBPA worked with the Duke Carbon Offsets Initiative at Duke University to
establish a home energy efficiency workshop now available to the general public
and companies interested in providing home energy efficiency education to their
employees as a workplace benefit. The workshop is one to four hours long, led
by NCBPA staff and includes hands-on demonstrations and group activities in a
classroom environment. More information can be found on www.HomeEnergyNC.org
under the Employer section.

▶▶ NCBPA has received positive feedback from MLS directories, home builders
associations, real estate associations and appraisers on its plans to include a “Click
here for more information on green features” link on MLS directories across the
state. NCBPA hopes to implement this feature in at least one MLS directory in 2018.

▶▶ NCBPA has been developing a consumer education website for owners and operators
of commercial and industrial buildings since May of 2017. The website will
launch in Q2 of 2018 as a free role-based online resource for restaurants, offices,
public buildings and many others to learn about the value of high performance
construction.

◀ 46 ▶
 S2 BUILD SUPPORT AMONGST KEY STAKEHOLDERS

Need:
Local, state, regional and national stakeholders involved in energy efficient, green and high
performance construction lack coordination and collaboration in advancing market development
efforts particularly between new and existing construction and residential and commercial
construction.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA continues to lead efforts in North Carolina to gain support for “Green MLS”
efforts from local, regional and state trade associations for home builders, realtors,
appraisers and MLS directories. Association staff frequently meet with and present
to local members of these groups to gain their support. Beginning in March of 2018,
NCBPA staff will present the results of these findings to local groups to educate
them about their markets and what steps they can take to move them forward.

▶▶ NCBPA has surveyed builders, realtors, appraisers and MLS administrators across the
state to learn what barriers they see in the marketplace and develop solutions to
overcome them. This work has helped identify key issues that need to be resolved
including determining how home builders should list new homes on MLS directories
and how green-certified appraisers can advertise their expertise to lenders and
builders in their service territories.

▶▶ NCBPA has obtained verbal commitments from three of the five metro-area MLS
directories in the state to take on the association’s recommendations for MLS
“greening” and hopes to have this work completed with at least one in 2018.

◀ 47 ▶
 S3 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Need:
A shortage of skilled labor for traditional and energy efficient, green and high performance
construction exists in local, state, regional and national markets that inhibits continued construction
growth. For “Green MLS” efforts, there are just three green-certified appraisers in North Carolina,
none of which are actively using their certification in local markets. Realtors and lenders educated
in green real estate and lending are similarly not finding opportunities to use these skills and
expertise in local markets.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA joined the Health, Safety and Comfort Coalition of North Carolina in early
2017 to work more closely with trade associations and licensing boards serving
plumbing, electrical, HVAC and other trades in order to partner on workforce
development opportunities.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to offer its Job Seekers and Job Board pages on its website to help
place industry professionals and staff available positions with industry companies.
Additionally, association staff frequently speak to community college and university
programs, and offers an internship program of its own throughout the year.

▶▶ NCBPA is actively developing certification programs for insulation and crawlspace

contractors that should be available in 2018.

▶▶ NCBPA is working with partner organizations to offer the right types of training,
education and certifications needed by realtors, appraisers and lenders to more
actively participate in the market. NCBPA believes that the current five-day training
for appraisers should be reviewed and updated to reflect recent market trends that
suggest shorter courses with less focus on solar and greater focus on appraisal
practices may serve markets better.

◀ 48 ▶
 S4 RECOGNITION OF TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP

Need:
Builders, home buyers and industry stakeholders oftentimes believe the upfront costs of energy
efficient, green and high performance construction outweigh the benefits that may be received.
A lack of recognition of the total cost of ownership is in place across the market.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA is working with Kerry Langley, a high performance home lender with First
Landmark Bank in Atlanta, to pilot a total cost of ownership (“ProjectTCO”) software
with high performance builders in markets across North Carolina. The software
offers visual comparisons of upfront costs vs. long-term and monthly benefits for
high performance homes versus others. NCBPA board members and staff have been
actively reviewing the software for several months and are seeking out builder
participants.

▶▶ NCBPA is also targeting municipal efforts to incorporate total cost of ownership,

energy efficient construction and rating systems into sustainability and
housing plans, as the City of Raleigh has done in its 2030 Comprehensive Plan
(Environmental Protection section).

◀ 49 ▶
 S5 IMPROVE AVAILABILITY OF HOME AND
BUILDING CERTIFICATION DATA

Need:
With 42 unique certification and rating programs available in North Carolina alone, improved
accessibility, transparency and standardization of program data is needed to grow its use and value
in the marketplace.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA continues to advocate for RESNET’s implementation of an open data access
policy that would allow industry stakeholders and third parties to access rating data
for use in MLS integrations.

▶▶ NCBPA partner organization Home Innovation Research Labs signed a data sharing
agreement with NCBPA partner Pivotal Energy Solutions in late 2016 that provides
all NGBS certification data to the cloud-based software for use in MLS integrations.

▶▶ Through its annual inventory project, NCBPA educates data sources on the need
for greater accessibility, transparency and standardization of program data that
encourages policy and data changes that offer improved availability through their
programs.

◀ 50 ▶
 S6 LOCAL REBATE AND INCENTIVE PROGRAMS

Need:
Improved consumer education on available local rebate and incentive programs for energy
efficient, green and high performance construction would encourage program participation and the
development of new programs across the state.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA’s “The Business Case for Energy Efficiency: How Investing in Less Creates
More for North Carolina” policy report highlights available programs and
provides recommendations to utilities, regulators and policy makers to encourage
improvements to existing programs and new programs in local areas. Visit
www.BuildingNC.org to download a copy of the report.

▶▶ NCBPA is leading advocacy efforts in 2018 to establish more and better local
programs with cities and counties across the state.

▶▶ The NC Clean Energy Technology Center continues to make improvements to

the DSIRE database that houses local, state and netional energy efficiency and
renewable energy rebate and incentive programs.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to offer support on an as-needed basis to utilities looking to

expand or offer rebate and incentive programs in local markets across the state.

◀ 51 ▶
 S7 INVEST IN NEW TECHNOLOGIES

Need:
Greater industry efforts are needed to bring together certification and rating program data in order
to integrate them into the real estate market. Three metro-area MLS directories in North Carolina
have explicitly stated that they are not interested in establishing system integrations with individual
programs and instead will only work with software providers that aggregate data from multiple
programs.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA invested $5,000 in the funding of a cloud-based software program that
integrates industry data into MLS directories. A prototype of the software is in final
development.

▶▶ NCBPA staff and board members have performed several reviews of the ProjectTCO
software referred to in S4 and are assisting in the establishment of pilot usage with
builders across the state.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to advocate for improvements to Green MLS technologies that

support market needs defined in this report. One example is RESNET’s development
of an Appraiser Portal that provides members of the Appraisal Institute with access
to rating data for use in appraisal reports.

▶▶ NCBPA’s nonprofit RESNET Rating Providership program continues to invest in

its software platform Axis in order to improve accessibility, transparency and
standardization of program data.

◀ 52 ▶
 S8 INCREASE CONSUMER AND VENDOR ACCESS
TO UTILITY USAGE DATA

Need:
In order to improve the transparency and visibility of energy and water usage of North Carolina
homes and buildings, greater consumer and third party access to the data is needed.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA is actively participating in efforts to work with North Carolina utilities to
establish policies and procedures that provide increased consumer and third party
access to utility usage data.

◀ 53 ▶
 S9 IMPROVE BUILDING AND ENERGY CODE
REQUIREMENTS AND OPTIONS
Need:
North Carolina’s current residential and commercial building and energy code requirements lack a
variety of measures that would offer property owners and managers energy efficient, green and high
performance benefits. The state’s next 2018 code, going into effect on January 1st of 2019, has been
in development since the summer of 2016.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA attended all North Carolina Building Code Council quarterly meetings in
2016 and 2017, has proposed supportive code changes in several meetings and has
advocated against roll-backs of energy saving requirements proposed by industry
trade groups.

▶▶ NCBPA has also advocated for industry supporters to be appointed by the Governor
to the Building Code Council.

▶▶ NCBPA’s “The Business Case for Energy Efficiency” policy report details a variety
of code improvement opportunities that the association believes North Carolina
regulators, utilities and policy makers should support.

▶▶ NCBPA offers energy code workshops to builders, architects, contractors and other
stakeholders to assist in their understanding and implementation of the new code
requirements.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to advocate for code improvements in 2018 that offer North
Carolina builders, contractors and consumers cost-effective energy and performance
benefits.

◀ 54 ▶
S10 CREATE INNOVATIVE FINANCING PROGRAMS

Need:
North Carolina’s market for energy efficient, green and high performance homes and buildings could
benefit from innovative financing programs that afford builders and developers, home and building
owners, contractors and others with improved financing terms and capabilities.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA was nearly successful in passing its Commercial Property Assessed Capital
Expenditures (C-PACE) bill into law during the 2017 session. The association is
currently working through its 2018 legislative plan to pass the bill into law, which
would allow for municipalities to establish local C-PACE ordinances that would
result in this innovative financing program being made available to commercial
building and property owners.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to monitor Residential PACE financing activity at the federal level
that currently prevents the program from moving forward in any new states.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to support partner organizations in advocating for the

implementation of on-bill financing programs through investor-owned, municipal
and electric cooperative utilities.

▶▶ NCBPA held a federal lobby day in Washington, DC in September of 2017 to support

federal tax incentives and financing programs that support consumers and builders
in North Carolina. The association will hold its 2018 lobby day on April 26th.

◀ 55 ▶
 S11 IMPROVING MARKET VALUATION

Need:
Improving the market valuation of energy efficient, green and high performance homes and buildings
in the state is seen as the second greatest need in the marketplace, behind consumer education. If
home and building owners, along with builders and contractors, receive a greater financial return for
the oftentimes higher upfront costs of these homes and buildings, it is widely believed that market
demand would increase significantly.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA invested ten months of work into this report in order to provide hard data
and document market solutions to improving market valuation in North Carolina.

▶▶ NCBPA is also working with MLS directories and other trade groups to implement
the recommendations detailed in this report.

◀ 56 ▶
S12 DOCUMENT AND COMMUNICATE FEATURES
USING CONSISTENT, DATA-DRIVEN AND
STANDARDIZED METHODS

Need:
In part due to the more than 42 certification and rating programs available in North Carolina, it is
important to ensure that the builders, contractors, program administrators and other stakeholders
involved in the data collection process are following consistent communication methods related to
the data used in each of their programs. Doing so minimizes the potential challenges faced by MLS
directories to accept and manage the industry data provided to their systems.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA’s RESNET Providership software partner Pivotal Energy Solutions achieved
RESO compliance for its Axis software in 2017, an industry standard for real estate
software systems. The software has also been built to comply with the residential
retrofit industry’s HPXML data standardization protocol.

▶▶ NCBPA plans to pilot its recommended data and communication procedures with
local green and high performance building councils across the state in 2018 to learn
how local markets can best implement Green MLS best practices whether or not
data integrations are available. A variety of steps including usage of the Appraisal
Addendum, requesting a certified green appraiser and many others can be piloted to
identify and work through local market barriers.

◀ 57 ▶
S13 PROVIDE VISIBILITY AND TRACKING OF
INVENTORIES

Need:
Greater visibility and tracking of the quantity, locations and characteristics of energy efficient,
green and high performance homes and buildings are needed to properly assess their value in the
marketplace.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA believes that this study is a good starting point to promote discussion
on how and why increased visibility and tracking of inventories supports market
development. The association has used this study to promote improvement
opportunities in local, state, regional and national markets that offer immediate
and long-term solutions for continued market development. As a result, partner
organizations are interested in replicating the study in other markets, bringing more
attention to North Carolina’s market for high performance homes and buildings.

◀ 58 ▶
S14 OFFER FOCUSED CONTINUING EDUCATION
OPPORTUNITIES

Need:
Continuing education opportunities are needed for builders, realtors, appraisers and lenders to
support the topics included in this report. Because North Carolina builders have no continuing
education requirements, offering classroom workshops is a challenging approach to accomplishing
these goals. Current educational courses on these topics available to realtors, appraisers and
lenders are lengthy and offered inconsistently.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA presented on the Green MLS topic many times in 2017 via webinar,
conferences and in-person meetings to key stakeholder groups. The association
continues this work in 2018.

▶▶ NCBPA is currently working with local and state trade organizations to outline
continuing education workshops that provide the right level of education on these
topics to stakeholder groups.

▶▶ NCBPA believes that the current five-day training for appraisers should be reviewed
and updated to reflect recent market trends that suggest shorter courses with less
focus on solar and greater focus on appraisal practices may serve markets better.

◀ 59 ▶
S15 GREEN NORTH CAROLINA’S MLS DIRECTORIES

Need:
Roughly 35 MLS directories exist in North Carolina, most of which use proprietary software systems.
In order to “green” them, MLS directory staff must understand the opportunities these efforts offer
them and convey them effectively to their boards in order to gain approval to implement the
enhancements (more green fields, auto-population, etc.). If one local MLS chooses to implement the
green enhancements, other local MLS directories in the state that use the same software program
will have the ability to enable those same features.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA staff have been actively meeting with MLS directories in each of the state’s
five metro markets and have obtained verbal approval from staff at three of the
systems that they would request approval of their boards to move these initiatives
forward. As of March of 2018, these efforts are still underway and board approval
has not been provided by any MLS directories.

▶▶ A scope of work is provided in the Appendix of this report that can be used to “green”
individual MLS directories.

◀ 60 ▶
S16 INCORPORATE DATA INTO SALES AND
APPRAISAL PROCESS
Need:
North Carolina appraisers are only able to attribute additional appraised value to energy efficient,
green and high performance homes and buildings if valid comparables are available in local markets.
For sales and purchase transactions, this same data is needed in order to support increased sales
and purchase prices for these homes and buildings as well. Unfortunately, North Carolina as a
whole lacks many of the necessary policies, procedures, resources and infrastructure that would
provide this data. However, solutions are available for each of these needs.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA is working with partner organizations to auto-populate industry data dating
back to 2007 into MLS directories that would automatically populate certification,
verification, rating and feature data for homes listed in MLS directories. Doing so
eliminates the need for realtors to post this information in listings manually, which
is a known obstacle for both new and existing home listings.

▶▶ Listing new construction homes in the MLS overnight is a procedure that can be
used to ensure that the sales of energy efficient, green and high performance homes
are recorded in the MLS (in many cases this does not happen) if only for the reason
of being used as comparables for similar homes built and sold in the future. Over
time, these historical listings will establish a comparables market that can be used
by realtors and appraisers.

During our research on this topic, NCBPA received feedback from a Durham, NC-
based high performance builder that sees an issue with this procedure that warrants
consideration. Randy Lanou of BuildSense states that:

“BuildSense builds well-crafted and sustainable design-build projects in the Triangle that
exceed National Green Building StandardTM, ENERGY STAR® and other certification program
requirements. While our future clients would benefit from greater visibility of the added
financial value of these high performance homes – through more accurate and higher
appraised values – the individuals contracting with us to design and build their homes often
prefer to keep the details of the agreements to buy land and to build their homes private.
Most of our clients would not agree to briefly listing their homes on the MLS for this reason.”

◀ 61 ▶
S17 DEVELOP AUTOMATED SYSTEMS INTEGRATIONS

Need:
Most of North Carolina’s 35 or more MLS directories operate independent software systems that will
take years to integrate on a case-by-case basis. Accordingly, a focus on the common systems – those
that use national MLS software platforms – would yield the best results.

Solution(s):
▶▶ NCBPA’s ongoing MLS integration efforts focus on local MLS directories that each
use a different national software platform. By focusing on these software programs,
it may be possible to “green” 80% of North Carolina’s MLS market through these
systems alone. Doing so would make these same enhancements available to all
other users of these national MLS software systems across the country, effectively
“greening” 40% of the national market.

▶▶ NCBPA continues to support efforts by Pivotal Energy Solutions to build-out the

company’s cloud-based software program that is capable of integrating with each of
the national software programs used by North Carolina’s metro-area MLS directories.

◀ 62 ▶
S18 ENSURE SELECTION OF QUALIFIED APPRAISERS

Need:
There are only three certified green appraisers in the state of North Carolina that have taken and
passed the Appraisal Institute’s five-day certification workshop. While builders, realtors, owners
and lenders should request a green-certified appraiser on qualified homes and buildings, the
limited number of certified appraisers prevents any tangible market impact from these appraisals
from happening. One green appraiser serving the Asheville market, North Carolina’s most densely
saturated market for green construction, has not been asked for a green appraisal in their first six
months with the certification.

Solution(s):
▶▶ Realtors, builders, owners and lenders need to be educated on the opportunity to
formally request a certified green appraiser and dismiss appraisers that demonstrate
a lack of expertise in properly valuing green features. NCBPA is working with
partner organizations to offer training and communications to address this need.

▶▶ The current five-day certification workshop offered by the Appraisal Institute is seen
as a barrier to establishing more certified appraisers in the state. NCBPA and many
of its members believe that a less time consuming and costly training would better
serve the market.

▶▶ NCBPA is working with local partners to implement pilot programs that would
increase the usage of the Appraisal Institute’s “Green Addendum” and promote
requests of certified appraisers while also dismissing unqualified appraisers.

NORTH CAROLINA’S THREE GREEN-CERTIFIED APPRAISERS

https://www.appraisalinstitute.org/education/education-resources/green-building-resources/

Miles Hamrick
Fidelity Valuation Partners JW Appraisal Services
Appraisal Services, Inc.

Miles Hamrick Charles H. Henderson, MAI Janice E. Whitson Waycaster

188 Double Oaks Road 401 Hawthorne Ln Suite 110-141 3724 A Sugar Hill Rd
Gastonia NC 28056 Charlotte NC 28204 Marion NC 28752
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

◀ 63 ▶
 S19 ENGAGE LENDING COMMUNITY

Need:
Many residential lenders are unwilling and unable to incorporate the added financial benefits of
high performance homes in the lending terms of their buyers. For builders seeking to build and sell
high performance homes, having favorable financing terms for their prospective buyers and accurate
appraisals can result in tens of thousands of dollars in additional profit or cost savings. For home
buyers, optimized financing strategies can be made available due to the mortgagee’s improved
ability to afford and pay the monthly mortgage because the homes have lower operating expenses
(utility bills) and reduced maintenance expenses.

Solution(s):
Kerry Langley, Founder of TCO Consulting, LLC in Atlanta, is a mortgage lender dedicated to helping
builders and home buyers obtain financing developed specifically for high performance homes.
Over the last few years, Kerry, leaning on his successful thirty-year lending career, has developed
a proprietary set of software tools specifically to address the afore mentioned financial obstacles.
These tools, collectively referred to as ProjectTCO™, have been developed as enhancements to “off
the shelf” mortgage solutions and are readily available to homeowners today exclusively from Kerry’s
team of “high performance lenders” at First Landmark Bank (headquartered in Atlanta, expanding
nationwide).

Project TCO is a national initiative

that has been developed to help
every American family reduce the
total cost of owning their homes. We
focus the majority of our work on
the two largest expenses associated
with home ownership ... the monthly
mortgage payment and the monthly
utility expenses.

◀ 64 ▶
Here, Kerry answers NCBPA’s questions on how to include the impact on TCO of added
ProjectTCOTM addresses three major critical features/criteria like solar PV, high speed
challenges faced by new home builders and EV chargers, water conservation strategies,
their potential clients: loan prepayment strategies and commuting
expenses. At the end of the day, the software
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ details how the better built home will save
NCBPA: How does your software help a builder the homeowner money and be more valuable
or home buyer determine, and hopefully receive in the long-run. The critical piece, that sets
in their financing package, the added financial apart of teams, is that as a lender, we build
benefits of, for example, a $400,000 high financing packages that actually account for
those savings and benefits … most lenders
performance home with a HERS® Index Score of
don’t do.
50 versus a comparable home costing $380,000
with a worse HERS Rating of 75?
NCBPA: Acknowledging that high performance
homes can often cost more to build than code-
Kerry: ProjectTCOTM was built to accurately
built homes, how can the long-term financial
model the true value proposition of a high
value of a high performance home be shown to
performance home and help builders and
offset the higher up-front costs?
home buyers obtain financing that reflects
it. Using the High Performance Lending™
Kerry: The tools utilized included in the
software, we develop house by house and
ProjectTCO™ program accounts for the added
project by project financing models and
affordability and lasting market value of high
marketing templates. This tool incorporates
performance homes. By combining the data
data from HERS® Index Scores and other published in the annual NAHB “Priced Out
certification/verification programs, and Report” with the “Expand Your Reach” software
using them, we develop customized financial module of the ProjectTCO™ program, we work
illustrations that compare the “total cost of with builders on both a macro and micro
ownership” (TCO) of a specifically identified level (drilled down to house by house) to help
high performance home to a non-high them capitalize on the power of innovative
performance comparable, either resale or financing strategies to reach more buyers and
new construction. The software effectively sell more homes. For home buyers that use
compares and contrasts the total cost of FHA financing, this can potentially expand
owning up to four homes simultaneously and purchasing power by approximately 5%. And
is based on criteria including sales price, loan for buyers that use conventional financing, the
type, loan term, energy performance, HERS® increase in purchasing power can be upwards
Index Score monetization, interest rate and of 6.5%.
PMI structure. It also has been programmed

◀ 65 ▶
NCBPA: Lenders have the power to request the incremental value. Just over two years
qualified “Green” Appraisers to perform an accurate ago, we started working with a local Atlanta
appraisal of high performance homes. How does area builder of EarthCraft Certified homes. By
ProjectTCO™ help you ensure that an accurate using the innovative strategies contained in
value is provided? our “Support the Value” program - each of the
appraisals we have obtained for this builder’s
Kerry: Utilizing the proprietary “Support buyers have reflected a $10,000 across the
the Value” contract templates and appraisal board adjustment for the certification alone,
support business strategies contained in the and none of these appraisals were challenged
ProjectTCO™ program, we help builders and by underwriters. We believe that we can
home buyers resolve this challenge. Many replicate this success for high performance
folks have focused on training appraisers homes in markets across the country.
to understand the science behind a high
performance home. Our approach is to focus on Visit www.teeceeo.com for more information on
working with qualified appraisers and provide this innovative financing software.
them with market-based sales data to justify

Screenshots from ProjectTCOTM

estimating the Monthly Total
Cost of Ownership of the same
home with different HERS(R) Index

◀ 66 ▶
S20 PILOT IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WITH LOCAL
STAKEHOLDERS
Need:
Local stakeholder organizations including green and high performance building councils,
MLS directories and realtor associations can take on local pilots to implement most of the
recommendations included in this report. Doing so will help educate local stakeholders on the
value of energy efficient, green and high performance homes and buildings while also identifying,
and hopefully resolving, local market barriers.

Solution(s):
▶▶ The HERS® Index Score, a fundamental program for Green MLS activities, should be
used on all homes.

▶▶ The Appraisal Institute’s “Green Addendum” should be used on all homes.

▶▶ “Green” features and certifications should be advertised and marketed in all MLS
listings and at all homes.

▶▶ Green-certified appraisers should be requested on all appraisals. If an unqualified

appraiser is assigned to the appraisal, the requesting party (builder, realtor or
homeowner) should dismiss the appraiser and request another of the lender. A form
letter from the Appraisal Institute is available for this purpose.

▶▶ New construction homes should be listed in the MLS for at least one day to make
them available for use in comparables going forward.

◀ 67 ▶
APPENDIX

◀ 68 ▶
BEST PRACTICES FOR “GREENING” OF MLS
DIRECTORIES
To support efforts to “green” MLS directories individually or in groups, NCBPA has developed the
following best practices to follow. Additional information and resources are listed in the “Supportive
Resources” section below.

STEP 1: Gain necessary buy-in, support and approval to move forward with
MLS “Greening” efforts.
▶▶ Form a small committee of interested MLS users to work with local realtors, lenders,
appraisers and builders to outline the business case and gain support and approval
for these efforts.
»» Perform studies listed below to obtain valuable data to help create the
business case.
»» Make sure to include a technology/MLS administrator on the committee.

▶▶ Outline the benefits to your MLS and its customers. Benefits may include:
»» Improving accuracy of MLS data being sourced from credible local, state,
regional and national programs.

•• Auto-population solves known issues of homes with ENERGY STAR®

appliances being listed as ENERGY STAR® Certified or homes with
no HERS®Index Score being listed with a HERS® Index Score of
zero.

»» Saving realtors time entering data that can be automatically populated.

•• Square footage, number of bedrooms and other pertinent non-green
data can be auto-populated through credible green program sources
that collect and record this data.

»» Improving realtor and consumer education by auto-populating educational

information on green features.

•• Links to more information on what HERS® Index Scores are, the

benefits of geothermal systems and other technical information can
be provided.

»» Opportunities to list new construction homes for use in comparables analysis

that normally are not listed in MLS directories.
•• Doing so opens a new revenue stream for MLS directories to list
more new homes for comparables purposes only. This should be
established at a reduced MLS usage fee and expedited process if
only listing partial data overnight for use in future comparables.

◀ 69 ▶
 »» Improving your MLS’ competitiveness vs. other MLS directories that do not offer
green feature or systems integrations capabilities.
»» Outline risks and liabilities as part of this assessment.

▶▶ Outline resources needed to make the changes and create a scope of work.
»» What changes are needed and who will make them? If the MLS directory is a
vendor-managed software, what experience do they have in greening efforts
with other local MLS providers?
»» How much time, money and system downtime will it cost?
»» Are there other non-green changes or enhancements that could be made at the
same time?
»» How will MLS users be notified of the changes?

▶▶ Present scope of work to MLS Board of Directors (if needed) and obtain approval to
move forward.

▶▶ Once approved, begin to educate MLS users and key stakeholders about the
upcoming changes.

▶▶ As needed, reach out to state, regional or national stakeholders for support.

STEP2: Add green fields and consumer education information to MLS directory.
▶▶ Work with the committee to identify specific fields that are wanted or needed in the
local market.

▶▶ Work with MLS software vendor or in-house resources to assess the impacts of
specific changes.

▶▶ Consider adding timestamp fields for rating and program fields that detail when the
certification or rating occurred.

»» Doing so provides important information on whether or not a HERS® Index

Score, certification or other feature is still effective or valid. Some green
features may degrade overtime and ratings change based on improvements or
degradation of homes.

▶▶ Connect MLS directories to webpages with information on “more green features” for
further education.
»» Many rating systems and programs have educational information – including
infographics and videos - listed on their websites.

▶▶ Ensure that data fields match standards needed for RESO and HPXML.

▶▶ Deploy and test new green fields.

◀ 70 ▶
STEP 3: Auto-populate green feature data via systems integrations with local,
state, regional and national programs and rating systems as sources.
▶▶ If you have a software vendor for your MLS system, leverage their existing
relationships with data sources (RESNET®, Home Innovation Research Labs, etc.) to
begin auto-populating data.

▶▶ If needed, establish a relationship with a third party data aggregator (Pivotal Energy
Solutions is an example) that can provide aggregate program data to your system.

▶▶ Focus on national rating and program systems as well as popular local programs.

▶▶ If possible, include advanced features such as the auto-population of the Green

Addendum or certification documents.

▶▶ Auto-populate timestamp fields for rating and program data.

▶▶ Include timestamps for rating and program dates to reflect old ratings or
certifications.

▶▶ Ensure that data fields and procedures meet RESO and HPXML compliance
requirements to mitigate liability for listing transparency and source attribution.

▶▶ Provide an override feature for MLS users that do not want to auto-populate green
feature data.

▶▶ Deploy and test new green auto-population capabilities.

STEP 4: Educate stakeholders on new information and procedures.

▶▶ Communicate changes to stakeholder groups and provide training on how to use
them.

▶▶ Educate realtors and consumers on the value of green ratings and programs and how
they can increase the value of their sales or purchase transaction.
»» If needed, shift the focus of recommended education from needing realtors,
appraisers and lenders to be “green” experts themselves to needing to know
how to best use the new information and resources available to them.

▶▶ Encourage realtors and appraisers to become green certified to better use and
promote the value of the new resources.

»» Hold local workshops to bring required certification training to local parties.

▶▶ Educate stakeholders on a critical step in the valuation process whereby lenders

can and should select qualified green appraisers based on ability, competency and
expertise to meet the requirements of green homes. A key step in the process is
communicating to the lender this need for a specific home.

◀ 71 ▶
 ▶▶ Support education of lenders, realtors and consumers on available financing
programs for green home buyers such as HomeStyle® Energy Mortgage Loans and
FHA’s “stretch” policy.

▶▶ Encourage buyers and realtors to value green features in their purchasing decisions.

▶▶ Work with Lenders that recognize the added value of high performance homes in
interest rate calculation and available incentives.

STEP 5: Perform studies and research to analyze green feature impacts in

local markets.
▶▶ Perform market studies to analyze the impacts of new green features and listing
procedures.
»» How many new homes are being built and/or listed with green features?
»» What percentage of existing homes have green features listed?
»» What is the added market financial value of green features (sale price and
appraised value)?
»» What are the top local, state, regional and national programs being used to
certify, verify and rate new and existing homes for high performance features?
»» What is the impact of local building and energy codes on these efforts?
»» What are the predominant building methods and features in homes carrying
more value in the marketplace?

▶▶ Study usage of the new green features and listing procedures to assess their impact
and what changes may be needed to support proper usage and improved impact.
»» Track their usage, effectiveness and impact on realtor efficiencies, valuation,
consumer and realtor education, the use of qualified appraisers and other key
metrics.

◀ 72 ▶
BEST PRACTICES FOR HOMEBUILDERS TO IMPACT
“GREEN” MLS EFFORTS
To support homebuilder efforts to participate in MLS “greening” efforts, NCBPA has developed the
following best practices to follow. Additional information and resources are listed in the “Supportive
Resources” section below.

STEP 1: Establish internal business procedures and vendor/partner

relationships that support improved valuation.
▶▶ Obtain a HERS® Index Score on all homes to establish a baseline of available
electronic data on green features.
»» Additional benefits include streamlined participation in certification and
verification programs, marketing benefits of third party verification and more.

▶▶ Hire a green-certified realtor on all home sales.

»» Seek out green-certified realtors with national designations such as EcoBroker
or NAR’s Green Designation. If not available, encourage your realtor to become
certified.

▶▶ Request a green-certified appraiser on all home sales.

»» Lenders cannot choose an appraiser by name due to federal regulations but can
select one by ability, competency, or expertise.
»» The builder’s role in this process is to communicate to the lender (either
directly or through the homebuyer and/or their realtor) that a qualified or
green-certified appraiser is needed for the appraisal. Doing so will help ensure
that only qualified appraisers accept the job request. This will also encourage
non-qualified appraisers to learn more about high performance homes and
perhaps become certified to earn this business in the future.
»» Do not be overly concerned about the lack of a green-certified appraiser in
your market. It is acceptable for lenders to cast a wide geographic net for an
appraiser due to the limited quantity of professional appraisers who specialize
in green construction.
»» If the appraiser selected is unqualified, the builder or consumer can raise this
issue with the lender and request another appraiser be selected. Consult with
state and federal appraisal guidelines for more information on when and how
to pursue this activity.

▶▶ Use nationally and locally-recognized certification and verification programs and

rating systems on all homes.

▶▶ Establish a process whereby all new homes are listed in the MLS at least overnight
in order to make them available for future comparables searches by realtors and
appraisers.
◀ 73 ▶
 ▶▶ Request homeowner permission to obtain and share utility data as evidence of the
energy and water saving features of the home.

STEP 2: Document and market green features to promote their value.

▶▶ List green features including certification and verification programs, rating systems
and detailed measures (attic insulation, high-efficiency HVAC, etc.) to promote the
home’s added benefits and reduce the liability of the appraiser and the lender in
assigning a higher value.

▶▶ Use sample letter templates in the Green Real Estate Toolkit that any homebuyer,
seller, builder, or realtor can use to communicate the green features of your home.
»» Prepare the buyer to notify their lender that a qualified green appraiser is
needed for the home.

▶▶ Ensure that your realtor makes available in the sales process hard and soft copies of
rating and program data, as well as specific green feature data such as invoices for
high performance and green products or specialty services.
»» Appraisers can incorporate builder cost data in their valuation but must have
the proper documentation to account for their value.

▶▶ Fill out the Green Appraisal Addendum on all homes and provide it to prospective
buyers and their realtors, appraisers and lenders.

»» The Addendum should be completed in part by a HERS® Rater who has much
of the needed data on energy efficiency, renewable energy and green features.
»» In some cases, “greened” MLS directories can receive an auto-populated
Addendum using data from HERS® Index Scores and other sources.

▶▶ Attach program and rating labels to homes – physically – and make sure that
verification documentation is provided in the homeowner’s guide for use in future
sales and appraisals of the home.

STEP 3: Local homebuilders associations should support pilot programs

to gain local support and growth.
▶▶ Local homebuilders associations and green/high performance building councils
should undertake local pilot program efforts to test out the recommendations
provided in this report.
»» Local builders that are already committed to energy efficient, green and
high performance construction can further promote their own homes while
encouraging other builders, realtors, appraisers, lenders and consumers in the
local market to participate.

◀ 74 ▶
 ▶▶ Local associations and councils can fund, support and/or perform needed market
studies to obtain valuable data to support MLS “greening” efforts.

▶▶ These organizations can also sponsor educational workshops for realtors, appraisers,
lenders and other builders as well.

▶▶ Green/high performance home tours are excellent, albeit resource intensive,

opportunities to make a large push for improved market transparency and value of
better homes.

▶▶ Test out locally whether or not using a private market appraisal – one ordered and
paid for by the builder directly – from a green-certified appraiser that is provided
to the appraiser hired by the lender helps educate the non-certified appraiser and
results in a higher appraised value.

▶▶ Where needed, local associations and councils can use their expertise to address
local market barriers to MLS “greening” efforts that may arise, such as how best to
list new construction homes in MLS directories.

▶▶ Request that member builders commit to 100% participation in these efforts to help
grow their use in the local market. Examples include:

»» 100% HERS® Index Scores.

»» 100% appraisal addendums.
»» 100% lender request of a green-certified appraiser.

SUPPORTIVE RESOURCES
Provided below are links to websites that contain helpful information on the “Green” MLS topic:

▶▶ NAR’s Green Designation: GreenResourceCouncil.org

▶▶ NAR’s Sustainability Website: nar.realtor/topics/sustainability
▶▶ Appraisal Institute’s Green Building Resources: AppraisalInstitute.org – “green building resources”
▶▶ NAHB’s Green Buildings Program: NAHBgreen.org
▶▶ EcoBroker: EcoBroker.com
▶▶ Elevate Energy: ElevateEnergy.org
▶▶ Green the MLS Tool Kit: GreenTheMLS.org
▶▶ Green Real Estate Toolkit: ecoachievers.com/resources/green-real-estate-toolkit/