.

Home page

Text size

E-mail this page

SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - A year after the city's think-green, energy-efficient building standard was put in place, home builders in Yellowknife still say it's bad for business.

The City of Yellowknife first raised the ire of local home builders and Regent Home Systems in Lethbridge, Alta., in 2007 when it proposed the new standard. Now passed in January 2008, the bylaw requires all new homes built in Yellowknife - and those manufactured elsewhere and shipped here - to meet the EGH 80 standard, which is to reach 80 in a scale of 1-100.

A new house rating between 70-80 is considered energy-efficient, while a new house scoring 80-90 is considered highly efficient.

Yellowknife home building company Premium Homes Ltd. hasn't sold a single house since the city implemented its EnerGuide 80 standards, said company owner Gerry Borschneck.

"Because of our costs, we aren't competitive with the existing homes anymore," said Borschneck.

"That's an extra 10 thousand dollars on our houses for nothing," he added.

"It's going to cost us so much money to achieve it and it's hardly worth it," said Les Rocher, president of Homes North.

He said the EnerGuide for Houses (EGH) 80 standard is "ridiculous."

It's likely the city's first EGH 80 homeowner, however, would disagree. Philip Rogers, owner of GAP Electric, and his family didn't know they would become a "first" when they moved into the city's only EGH 80-approved house in December.

"We had no idea," said Angela Rogers, Philip's wife.

It wasn't until after the house was done the family found out it would be the sole home completed to standard since the controversial proposal came forward in 2007.

"When we took the original plans they bought into us (the score) was 73," said Bill Fandrick, the city's building inspections manager.

"On average most houses built in Yellowknife are built better than the average Canadian house because of our climate." Ratings of "73, 74 pretty much represents the average house built in Yellowknife over the past 10 years or so," added Fandrick.

While Rogers proudly showed off his new home, he was aware of the controversy the city's the standard generated.

"It scared us a bit actually - all (the) criteria," said Philip, recalling how he felt about the proposal when it first came forward two years ago.

It turned out he needn't have worried. Rogers did all the wiring himself, but said the main reason the house was able to get a gold star standard was because contractors used the right materials and insulation.

"The one thing that probably put us over is the wood pellet boiler," he added.

The house also uses all energy-efficient appliances and has windows situated throughout the house to maximize sunlight.

Meeting the standard, "is not too bad for new house construction," said Rogers, adding trying to modify an old house is no easy task.

Rogers estimated he'd be able to recuperate extra costs spent on getting the house up to standard in about six to seven years.

His advice for anyone looking to become the second EGH 80 homeowner is to "have a good plan before you start actual construction."

Currently, there is a three-year grace period in place where new homes can get the go-ahead without meeting the EGH standard - but manufacturers must try to bring it as close to the goal as possible.

"But you're still going through all the costs and all the procedures. Whether you pass the (EnerGuide) or not the costs are all still there," said Borschneck, who said the grace period doesn't count for much.

Not all manufacturers feel the same way they did in 2007, according to Fandrick.

"The manufacturer (Regent Homes) that said they wouldn't supply to the market are showing a real willingness to work with us," said Fandrick.

"We're having a lot of discussion back and forth and we're trying different things and coming close," he said, adding one manufacturer recently came close to 80.

Regent Homes, who in 2007 said the new standards would "eliminate" the business from the market, did not return calls for comment before press time.