But the most unconventional aspect of this home, by far, is its value proposition. Aptly named, the GreenHouse is testing the premise that next-generation home buyers will be willing to spend a little more up front on green stuff if the payoff is lower long-term maintenance and utility costs. Unlike the commodity dwellings of the housing boom, this residence isn’t destined for a life of flipping. It’s more akin to a well-made Swiss watch, which comes with a slightly higher price tag, but lasts a lifetime.
Builders who believe that achieving net zero means higher material costs can feel validated in knowing they are correct. KB Home estimates the cost of greening this house at $70,000—roughly $60,000 of which can be attributed to its solar energy features (the other $10,000 went to HVAC upgrades and high-efficiency lighting and windows).
But those who assume that green building means throwing all of your established subcontractor relationships out the window may be interested in this little insight: “We did use specialists for the solar thermal and photovoltaic installations,” says Dan Bridleman, vice president of national purchasing and contracts for KB Home, which currently ranks as the nation’s fifth largest builder. “But otherwise we relied completely on our existing trade base to get this house built.” (See “Green in Balance,” page 7, for a detailed rundown of the home’s net-zero process and formula.)
Is this a glimpse into production housing’s future? George Glance, president of KB Home’s Central Florida division, likes to think so. “This house is mainstream and something buyers can relate to,” he says. “It’s a functional, right-sized floor plan that is very livable and finely appointed. At the same time, it’s a very advanced house. If you have a million dollar budget that’s one thing, but when you’re operating with a sales price of $380,000, you really have to be efficient without compromising the function or finish of the home.”