Massachusetts

On the other side of the country, Massachusetts has taken a more incremental approach. Instead of trying to create a mandatory, comprehensive green code all at once for the entire state, it is focusing on energy for now, and giving individual municipal jurisdictions the choice of adopting requirements that are more stringent than those mandated statewide.

This optional code—formally titled 780 CMR Appendix 120.AA, but better known as the Massachusetts Stretch Energy Code because it stretches beyond current requirements—was adopted in 2009 by the Massachusetts Board of Building Regulations and Standards, making Massachusetts the first state in the nation to adopt an above-code appendix to its "base" building energy code.

In 2008, officials in Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick's Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs asked Lexington, Massachusetts–based Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP) to work with them—along with utility companies and other stakeholders—to develop this appendix.

According to Carolyn Sarno, senior program manager at NEEP, the stretch code emphasizes performance over prescriptive requirements, and is designed to deliver "cost-effective construction that is at least 20 percent more energy-efficient" than can be expected from the baseline Massachusetts Building Energy Code.

A strong motivation for creating this optional code came from the local jurisdictions themselves, many of which expressed interest in an energy code more stringent than that of the state. Sarno explains that, rather than allowing cities and towns to write their own disparate regulations, Massachusetts sought "one equally vetted code that communities could adopt."

More than 70 communities have adopted the stretch code to date, making the appendix mandatory within those jurisdictions for all residential new construction, renovations, and additions, and for all commercial new construction and additions. Historic buildings and houses in historic districts are exempt from the stretch code.

Although adopting the above-code appendix is optional, doing so is one of five conditions a municipality must meet before it can be designated a Green Community, at which point it becomes eligible for state grants to fund energy-efficiency and other clean-energy projects.

New York City

Yet another approach has been taken by New York City. In 2008 Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn requested that the New York chapter of USGBC, Urban Green Council, establish a task force to review the existing building code and recommend to the city changes that would advance sustainable construction practices.

The subsequent effort was notably different from that of California, explains Russell Unger, executive director of Urban Green Council: Because the recommendations were coming from a task force to a legislative body and mayoralty, rather than from the agency that implements the regulations, "We could not set the bar as high."

Furthermore, the task force was charged with proposing green modifications to existing regulations and policies, rather than with creating a separate chapter or stand-alone code that dealt exclusively with sustainable issues.

And, finally, the New York task force looked not only at building codes but other types of city ordinances, such as health codes and consumer affairs regulations, to coordinate all policies affecting the built environment. For example, while recommending certain water-efficient fixtures be required in the code's plumbing section, the task force also suggested that the city's consumer affairs department prohibit the selling of other, water-inefficient fixtures. Making the noncompliant fixtures less readily available "helps with enforcement," says Unger.

The New York task force looked for changes that would not be too difficult or costly for the design and construction community but, when done citywide, would have a measurable improvement to the environment. Unger says about 17 percent of the proposals address peculiarities, or "impediments," in the existing city code that unnecessarily interfere with desirable green-building strategies.

Nineteen of the 111 recommendations have been enacted by the New York City Council to date. According to Unger, one no-cost enactment was particularly "monumental" because it actually expanded the stated role of the building code. Traditionally, the code has three purposes—protecting people's health, safety, and welfare. Now, in New York City, it also has a fourth––protecting the environment.

ASHRAE Standard 189.1

While some individual cities and states have been trying to address green code issues on their own, several organizations have been tackling the problem nationally. The first edition of the "Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings," or ASHRAE Standard 189.1, was published in 2009. Developed collaboratively by ASHRAE, USGBC, and the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES), it is the first nationwide minimum green standard for commercial buildings. It applies to new construction, additions, and renovations.

Although called a "standard," many view Standard 189.1 as a template that jurisdictions can use to write their own code because ASHRAE standards are written with minimum requirements and normative language and go through a thorough, multi-stage process of development and review.

After the initial introductory and administrative sections, the document is organized by chapters according to sustainable criteria similar to that used by LEED and other rating systems: site sustainability, water-use efficiency, energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality, and the building's impact on the atmosphere, materials, and resources. In addition, the standard includes a section that spells out requirements for commissioning, energy-use reporting, and other construction and operation protocols. To comply with Standard 189.1, a project must meet all mandatory provisions and either the prescriptive or performance options listed under each section.