CASBEE Property Appraisal PDF
CASBEE Property Appraisal PDF
This manual and the support tools shall be used at the users own responsibility.
Japan Sustainable Building Consortium and the Institute for Building Environment and Energy
Conservation bear no responsibility for the assessment results of this manual and the support tools
and for any damages caused by their use.
(2009 Edition)
Content
Terminology ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.Concept of manual.................................................................................................................. 19
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
References...................................................................................................................... 51
1.Objective surveys and subjective surveys on property markets ............................................. 51
1.1.
1.2.
Results of opinion surveys on the environment among investors and tenants ...................... 51
Impact of environmental performances on property rent ........................................................ 57
Terminology
Terminology on property appraisal in this manual
CASBEE or Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency, as its name indicates, is a
system designed to assess environment efficiency as well as buildings. Properties are generally defined as
land and improvements on the land, meaning buildings and structures combined with the land.
Therefore, it should be noted that this Property Appraisal Manual applies not only to buildings but also to the
sites of the buildings.
The type of property appraisal varies from assessments performed by qualified people licensed real estate
appraisers to those performed broadly and generally. The use of such words as prices and values used in
assessment also varies.
In explaining the pricing theory, it is important to use commonly-used expressions for such unfamiliar words as
net income and capitalization rate in order to make their meanings more understandable.
For these reasons, these words are defined and used as follows in this manual:
Property
Real estate appraisal
Price investigation
report by real estate
appraisers
Property appraisal
Price
Value
Net income
Capitalization rate
Direct capitalization
method
DCF method
Discount rate
Land and improvements on the land (as defined in Article 86.1 in the Civil Code)
Price assessment by licensed real estate appraisers based on the real estate appraisal
standards
Price assessment by licensed real estate appraisers based on specific assessment purposes
including those not based on the property appraisal standards
Value assessment of real estate including the real estate appraisal and price investigation
report by licensed real estate appraisers as well as those voluntarily performed by people
involved in real estate business for investment and other purposes.
Economic value expressed by monetary value
Broad concept including economic value, other specifications and levels, etc.
Proper income from a property. Net income calculated by deducting maintenance costs,
utility costs, taxes and property insurance costs, etc. from the total revenue such as rent, etc.
A rate used in directly calculating the value of the property based on the net income of a
certain period (normally 1 year). It includes changes in predictions on factors that affect the
future revenues and uncertainty (risks) accruing from the predictions.
A method of calculating the value of a property by dividing the net income of a certain period
(normally 1 year) by the capitalization rate. The risk of change in net income must be
considered through the capitalization rate. For this reason, for properties with the same
amount of expected net income, the rate is higher(lower) for a property with high(low) risk of
the change and, as a result, the value tends to be lower (higher).
Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. A method of tallying both present values of the net operating
income of a property during the holding period and the reversionary value (as calculated by
deducting the sales costs from the expected sales value) of the property at the end of the
holding period based on the assumption that the property is held for a certain period of time
(for example, 10 years).
A rate used in the DCF method to discount the future net income or the future reversionary
value to the current value. As changes in the net income during the assumed holding period
are reflected in the predictions of the net income, it is necessary to consider the other risks of
changes in the net income and reversionary value.
The environmental performance assessment by CASBEE is designed as a tool to appropriately assess the
asset values of buildings rather than the prices of sites, which weigh heavier in the property appraisal. In this
sense, the assessment by CASBEE can be described as the building asset value assessment. It is also
important to note that CASBEE deals broadly with the assessment of both the environment of buildings and the
environment of sites. In this sense, the assessment targets are the same as the property appraisal. However,
CASBEE deals with the environment within a site rather than the price of a site.
The words property appraisal, meanwhile, are used not only for real estate appraisal but also for voluntary
assessment by the broad range of people involved in property business. For this reason, the discussion on the
CASBEE- Property Appraisal deals mainly with the property appraisal based on the broad definition of asset
values of buildings + the environment of the sites, which could be easily understood by a wide range of people
involved in property and construction businesses.
(2009 Edition)
Owners/Users
Investors/Developers
Little demand for green buildings
in spite of their willingness to invest in
Designers/Builders
Owners/Users
Investors/Developers
Designers/Builders
* Reference document
RICS (Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors),
-Breaking the Vicious Circle of Blame- Making the Business Case for Sustainable Buildings, 2008
(2009 Edition)
1.1.
1.1.1.
What is CASBEE
CASBEE, the Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency, is a system for assessing
and rating the comprehensive environmental performance of the designated building(s) from two major aspects:
1) the environmental quality to be enhanced through its service performance, amenity, etc. and 2) the
environmental loads to be reduced through energy and resource saving, etc.
Labeling based on BEE
The assessment result is determined by the value of the Built Environment Efficiency (BEE), a quotient index of
Q (building environmental quality) as dividend and L (building environmental loads) as devisor (Fig. 1-1). It
briefly and explicitly indicates the diverse environmental performances of a building.
Resource consumption, CO2, etc.
Hypothetical Boundary
Q (Environmental Quality)
Built Environment
Efficiency
L (Environmental Load)
BEE
Exhaust, noise,
drainage, waste heat,
etc.
Site boundary
Fig. 1-1 CASBEE assessment by environmental quality (Q) and load (L)
A building with a higher BEE value (e.g. higher Q value and lower L value) is assessed to be more green.
Specifically, it is ranked according to five-grade system in terms of the BEE value from S (Excellent) over 3.0
points to C (Poor) under 0.5 points. This assessment result is indicated on BEE graph of L (0-100 points) as
the horizontal axis and Q (0-100 points) as the vertical axis, which graphically visualizes the environmental
performance for clear comparison between different buildings (Fig. 1-2).
BEE
BEE=3.0
100
Q (environmental quality)
Rank
S: Excellent
A: Very good
B+: Good
B-: Fairly poor
C: Poor
BEE=1.5
A
BEE=1.0
B+
: Green building
(Model case)
: Poor green building
B50
BEE=0.5
C
0
0
50
100
L
(environmental load) L
The first assessment tool CASBEE for Office was developed in 2002, followed by CASBEE for New
Construction in July 2003, CASBEE for Existing Building in July 2004 and CASBEE for Renovation in July 2005.
Japan Sustainable Building Consortium has been responsible for the development and the promotion since
2009.
These CASBEE assessment tools have been developed based on three principles: (1) To make assessment
through life cycles of buildings, (2) To make assessment of buildings in both environmental quality (Q) and
environmental load (L), (3) To make assessment by using BEE (Built Environment Efficiency), which is a new
assessment indicator developed based on the concept of environment efficiency.
CASBEE, as shown in Fig. 1-3, comprises the life cycle-based basic tools and expansion tools designed for
specific individual purposes. These are collectively called the CASBEE Family.
1) Housing category
[Legend]
Tools developed
Tools to be developed
CASBEE for Home (Existing Detached House)
CASBEE for Home (Dwelling Unit: tentative name)
3) Urban category
(2009 Edition)
Houses and Buildings, which started a public offering in April 2008, is designed to support the development of a
leading project for CO2-saving houses and buildings. For this project, CASBEE is used as an assessment
indicator to select projects to be subsidized. The new construction project in the model project to promote
CO2-saving houses and buildings requires the achievement of environmental performance equivalent to B+ or
higher by CASBEE.
The Leading Model Project for Excellent, Long-term Houses based on the Vision of the House for 200 Years
promoted by the Housing Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and Tourism has a system in
place to subsidize 2/3 or less of the construction costs for parts of buildings that use advanced materials,
technologies or systems in model projects that contribute to longer life cycles of houses by introducing such
advanced methods. The model project to promote CO2-saving houses and buildings also has a system in
place to subsidize 1/2 or less of the construction costs for parts of buildings that use advanced methods in
leading projects for houses and buildings with excellent CO2-saving effect. These subsidies are expected to
play an important role in the proliferation of green buildings as the approved projects show the actual economic
effects of the measures.
Effective use of natural energy
Fuel cell
Others
Creating comfortable external spaces,
etc. by greening of rooftops, etc.
Fig. 1-4 Image of the Model Project to Promote CO2-saving Houses and Buildings * Reference
Size
(Minimum
floor area)
Effective
date
Nagoya city
Osaka city
Yokohama city
Kyoto city
Kyoto pref.
Osaka pref.
Kobe city
Hyogo pref.
Kawasaki city
Shizuoka pref.
Fukuoka city
Sapporo city
Kita-kyushucity
Saitama city
Saitama pref.
2,000
5,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
5,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
2004.4
2004.10
2005.7
2005.10
2006.4
2006.4
2006.8
2006.10
2006.10
2007.7
2007.10
2007.11
2007.11
2009.4
2009.10
148
26
234
72
93
21
210
97
123
104
37
60
68
81
38
229
109
113
93
45
101
136
162
47
120
18
20
5
Aichi pref.
2,000
2009.10
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
173
73
102
68
33
115
104
187
40
222
37
77
18
Total
994
377
431
286
115
276
308
430
125
342
55
97
23
Gross total
3,859
These local governments have implemented the following policies by using CASBEE to increase the
proliferation of green buildings:
1) Application conditions for comprehensive design system
Some local governments define CASBEE assessment results as application conditions for the comprehensive
design system, which is an approval system for exceptions to limits on floor area ratios, etc. This is one of the
advanced uses of CASBEE for improving the urban environment through building administration. Currently, the
following local governments are using CASBEE for their comprehensive designing system:
Osaka City: A construction is approved in the case of B+ or higher (from October 2004)
Yokohama City: A construction is approved in the case of A or higher (from April 2006)
Nagoya City: The floor area ratio will be deregulated by up to 250% instead of the normal 200% in the
case of S or higher (from June 2005)
2) Application conditions for subsidies
For new construction of multiple-dwelling houses, building owners applying for building cost subsidy programs
administered by local governments are required to submit their CASBEE assessment results.
The Osaka City Advanced Environmental Housing Development Project (July 2005, the project ends by
the end of March 2007)
In the case of application for subsidies for the above project for multiple-dwelling houses, building owners
are required to obtain A or higher by CASBEE-Osaka, and constructions are to be approved in the order of
higher BEE values.
The Nagoya City Downtown Apartment Supply Project (November 2005)
The prioritization for constructions for the above project is determined based on the results of
CASBEE-Nagoya.
3) Advertisement display obligation
Kawasaki municipal government has the Kawasaki City Environmental Performance Display for
Multiple-Dwelling Houses for Sale System, which obliges building owners of multiple-dwelling houses to
display CASBEE assessment results on their advertisements. The municipal government requires that
advertisements of multiple-dwelling houses for sale among all the specific buildings (new buildings with a total
(2009 Edition)
floor area of over 5,000 , etc.) must display the environmental performance of the houses for sale and that
documents necessary for such advertisements must be submitted to the municipal government (an obligation to
display in advertisements and an obligation to report to the municipal government when displayed). The
municipal government also encourages sellers of such multiple-dwelling houses for sale to explain to buyers
about the environmental performance of the houses.
4) Certification systems unique to local governments
Yokohama municipal government has developed the Yokohama city green buildings assessment certification
system to certify the assessment results. This is a certification system implemented uniquely by Yokohama
municipal government based on CASBEE-Yokohama and is different from the third party certification system
currently in use by the Institute for Building Environment and Energy Conservation (IBEC), etc. The system is
implemented based on the Green Building Assessment Certification System Guideline defined by Yokohama
municipal government. The Yokohama city green building assessment certification committee, which consists of
academic experts, etc. assigned by the Yokohama mayor determines certifications and, if successfully certified,
provides certificates.
100
BEE=3.0
BEE=1.5
BEE=1.0
Q (Quality)
50
BEE=0.5
C
0
50
5
4
3
2
1
100
Retail shop
Hospital
Apartment
Hall
Office
Factor
School
Restaurant
Hotel
L (Load)
Fig. 1-6 Status of reporting environmental
2,000m2
performance
assessment in Nagoya city
CASBEE
10
Tool
Conditions
Incentives
Nagoya city
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Osaka city
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Yokohama
city
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Osaka pref.
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Kawasaki
city
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Note
Reporting is
discretionary for
5,000 or less
11
(2009 Edition)
Local
government
Tool
Sapporo
city
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Kita-kyushu
city
New
Construction
(Brief
version)
Conditions
Home
(Detached
House)
1.1.3.
Incentives
Note
Reporting is
discretionary for
less than 5,000
* Heartful
preferential
housing interest
rate system
(Preferential
interest rates for
buyers of
multiple-dwelling
houses and
detached
houses. 0.1%
lower in interest
rate than the
normal loan rate
at relevant
financial
institutions
(FY2008))
** Kita-kyushu
city living
assistance
program (The
municipal
government
subsidizes part of
the interest
payment for five
years. Interest
rate subsidization
rate: annual 1%,
up to 1 million
yen)
12
Supporting by
specifically
designating the
usage and size:
22%
Passive
standard: 70%
Supporting specifically
designated projects:
30%
Fig. 1-7 Status of using CASBEE for New Construction (Brief version) by builders*Reference 2
Effective tool
11
Externally appealing
2
0
5
4
3
2
1
CASBEE
13
(2009 Edition)
provides preferential interest rates of up to 1.2% (at the start of the system) according to the results of
CASBEE.
(5) Use for environmental performance diagnosis and renovation design for ESCO projects and existing
building stock renovations
CASBEE can be used for proposing operational monitoring commissioning and renovation designing of
buildings for the Energy Service Company (ESCO) projects and renovations of existing building stocks.
CASBEE for Renovation is a tool available for energy-saving renovations, etc.
(6) Use as an international tool
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is also working on the development of the international
standard on the method of assessing environmental performance of buildings called TC59/SC17. CASBEE, if
it complies with the international standard, may be used internationally in the future through, for example, the
multi-national cross-certification of environmental labels, etc. CASBEE has been translated and published in
foreign languages such as English and Korean. In China, a group led by Professor Jiang of Qinghua University
developed and publicly released in August 2003 the environmental performance assessment system GOBAS:
Green Olympic Building Assessment System which utilized the concept of CASBEE for use in designing,
building and operating facilities for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Soon, the comprehensive environmental
assessment system will be used for international competitive bidding in China and Asia in which Japanese
companies are expected to increase their participation.
1.1.4.
An increasing number of architectural schools including universities are using CASBEE. Many universities with
the faculty of architecture are using CASBEE for environmental planning trainings, etc. Architects already in
business are also hoping that CASBEE is used by architecture-related craft unions and academic groups for the
Continuing Professional Development (CPD).
1.1.5.
The CASBEE certification system and assessor registration system has been implemented by the Institute for
Building Environment and Energy Conservation (IBEC). The CASBEE certification has also been implemented,
since March 2008, by 11 organizations accredited by IBEC.
(1) Assessment certification system
The various usages of CASBEE are described in the previous sections of this manual. Securing reliability and
transparency are of crucial importance in providing CASBEE assessment results to third parties. The
assessment certification system is designed to secure reliability in providing such information and aims to
achieve proper operation and proliferation of CASBEE by reaffirming the accuracy of its assessment results. It
is designed to be used by designers, building owners and constructors, etc. to secure the reliability of the asset
value assessments and labeling, etc. of their buildings. This certification system covers a broad range of
buildings including new construction, existing buildings, renovations, urban development and homes (detached
houses). As of December 2009, 93 buildings have been certified.
(2) Assessor registration system
CASBEE is in principle designed to assess the buildings quantitatively to the extent possible. However, as it
also includes some qualitative assessment items, experts versed in knowledge and technology on the
comprehensive environmental performance assessment of buildings are required. For this reason, the
assessor registration system has been established. People wishing to be assessors need to take the
assessor training course and successfully pass the assessor exam and make registration. Currently,
CASBEE for Building Assessor who can handle CASBEE for New Construction, for Existing Building and for
Renovation, and CASBEE for Detached House Assessor who can handle CASBEE for Home (Detached
House) are available. Japanese 1st-class architects are qualified to take the CASBEE for Building Assessor
exam. As of December 2009, there are approximately 6500 CASBEE Asessors, including Building Assessors
and Detached Hosuse Assessors, across the country.
c 2009 Japan Sustainable Building Consortium (JSBC)
Copyright
14
6000
5000
CASBEE
CASBEE for Detached House Assessor
CASBEE
for Building Assessor
CASBEE
4000
2440
3000
2000
2760
1000
0
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009.4
Japanese and Canadian experts on environmental performance assessment tools have long been involved in
the joint study on the visualization of environmental performance through assessment and on the issue of
market transformation as they attach special importance on these themes. Since the international workshop
Strategic market reform for proliferation of green buildings in Tokyo in December 2006, the workshop on the
themes has been held continuously as described in Table 1-3 below.
The themes have attracted global attention especially after the World Sustainable Building Conference SB08
was held in September 2008. The conference also included forums on the themes described in
Table 1-4. In the forum on the theme of Special Forum 8: BEAM (Building Environmental assessment methods)
and Market Transformation, Professor Ray Cole of British Colombia University in Canada and other
researchers and users of assessment tools of various countries presented their tools and had a discussion. At
the forum, the concept of property appraisal using CASBEE was presented as a model case in Japan.
Table 1-3 Major outcomes of forums on assessment tools and market reform
Title
International Workshop on
Strategic Market Transformation for the
Promotion of Sustainable Buildings
2nd Joint Japan-Canada Workshop on
Building Environmental Assessment
Methods & Market Transformation
-Responding to the Urgency of Climate
Change
Workshop on Market Transformation for
the Promotion of Sustainable Buildings
Date
Dec. 2006
Place
Tokyo
Jun. 2007
Vancouver
Apr. 2008
Tokyo
Sep. 2008
Melbourne
Mar. 2009
Paris
Jul. 2009
Tokyo
Description
Market Transformation through Assessment/Rating
of Building Performance, Shuzo Murakami, and
others
Transforming the Building Market through
Assessment of Building Performance, Shuzo
Murakami, and others
Spread of CASBEE and Market Transformation of
Building Industry, Shuzo Murakami
Impact of Building Environmental Assessment
Methods, R. Cole, and others
Market Transformation brought about by Necessity
for Reducing Environmental Risks, Shuzo
Murakami
Assessment Tools for Building Performance to
Promote Energy Efficiency in the Building Sector,
Shuzo Murakami
Global trend on energy-saving regulations for
buildings (Shuzo Murakami)
15
(2009 Edition)
Speaker
Ray Cole (British Colombia University, Canada), Vanessa Gomes de Silva
(Campinas State University, Brazil), Shuzo Murakami (Building Research Institute,
Japan), Paul King (UKGBC, U.K.), Tom Hicks (USGBC, U.S.A.)
Richard Lorch (Building Research & Information), Thomas Luetzkendorf (Karlsruhe
University, Germany), John Goddard (RICS Oceania), Richard Reed (Deakin
University, Australia), David Lorenz (RICS EU), others
Craig Roussac (INVESTA, Australia), Daryl Browning (ISPT, Australia), Tomonari
Yashiro (The University of Tokyo, Japan)
Reference
1
Materials for the Third Symposium on CO2-Saving Houses and Buildings, Institute for Building Environment and Energy
Conservation
2
FY2008 Survey Report on CASBEE among BCS Design Committee Companies, Building Contractors Society
16
1.2.
Move toward considering environmental added values in the Japanese property appraisal
industry
(1) Reasons why the economic effects of green buildings were not analyzed in Japan
Despite the increasing popularity of CASBEE including those designed for local governments, its economic
effects and effects of additional values have rarely been analyzed unlike the certification of buildings by LEED in
the United States and Green Star. The possible reasons for this are as follows:
In 2001 when the R&D efforts for CASBEE started, the first property investment company, Japanese Real
Estate Investment Trust (J-REIT), was listed on the stock market in Japan. Following the listing, property
securitization-related transactions became active in the property markets in Japan until around 2007 in the fund
boom. Property for investment traded in the markets were subjected to due diligence to check overt risks for
investors such as the legality, structural safety, and environmental risks (asbestos, PCB, etc.) of buildings as
well as such risks as soil contamination and earthquakes, etc. Any insufficiencies in overt risk aversion were
deemed as devaluing factors.
Meanwhile, such environmental load factors as CO2 emissions and wastes generated while building, operating
and demolishing buildings or loss of bio-diversity as a result of development were not considered as the
above-mentioned overt risks. Property investment companies and private funds settled their accounts every
six months or a shorter cycle and placed their emphasis on improving short-term performance and considered
that environmental load risks against which there were no statutory regulations were only potential factors and
low-priority items.
(2) Beginning of consideration for environmental added values and theory
Under such circumstances, the thesis report commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Tokyo Association of
Real Estate Appraisers, released in October 2005, carried an article titled A note on environmental value added
for real estate (Masato Ito) (Reference3). The article attempted to explain theoretically the fact that reducing
environmental risks, improving images of assets and improving cash flow through energy saving, etc., which
were not considered important factors for property investment in those days, could create added values. The
article can be summarized as follows:
The value of a property, like other assets, is determined by three factors Expense characteristics (how much
cost is assumed for it), Marketability (how much its priced in markets) and Profitability (how much profit is
expected from it).
For the Expense characteristics, sellers have solid reasons for considering the factor. If sellers have paid
reasonable additional costs for properties with high environmental performance, the sellers naturally want to
add the costs to the sales prices. However, in the market, such properties cannot necessarily be traded at
prices with such an additional factor in mind. For the Profitability of properties, the properties may be accepted
by reasonable markets as long as they can generate profits in terms of investment. For this reason, the
Profitability is important for green properties.
The value of a property that reflects the profitability or the value indicated by the income approach can be
calculated by dividing net income produced by the property (deducting such costs as maintenance, taxes and
insurance, etc. from the total revenues produced by the property including rent, etc.) by capitalization rate of
the property (the percentage of net income to the amount of investment in the property). Formula-1 shows the
formula for the value indicated by the income approach (in the case of the direct capitalization method).
Value indicated by the income approach Net income produced by the property
Capitalization rate of the property
(Formula-1)
The above formula shows that the higher the net income the property can produce, the higher the property
value becomes. It also suggests the more stable the net income is (= lower the risk of changes in the net
income), the lower the capitalization rate becomes for the property investment, leading to higher property
values.
Thus, the increased net income could lead to the increased property value. The reduction in the capitalization
rate in the denominator could also lead to an increase in the property - value. The more stable the net income
is, the lower the capitalization rate can become for investors. For example, investment in 10-year government
bonds involves almost no risk of changes in the interest rate or no risk of loss of principal at maturity, making it
possible for investors to invest at the capitalization rate in the range of 1.3% (as of November 17, 2009).
17
(2009 Edition)
Maintenance
costs
Utility costs
Other costs
Repair costs
Fig. 1-11
Environmental
risks
Depreciation rate
Marketability
risks
Business risks
Other property
risks
Cap. Rate of
general financial
assets
Environmental
added values
Risk premium, etc. of a green property
Taxes
Cost of property as usual
Environmental
added values
Net income of
green property
Net income
of property
as usual
Property investment, meanwhile, involves depreciable assets and risk of changes in income and damage risks.
For this reason, even in the Marunouchi district of Tokyo where the income is regarded as most stable, the rate
is around 4% (as of November 17, 2009) and in areas where changes in rent fluctuate wildly, the rate is around
10% or even higher (as of November 17, 2009).
Fig. 1-11 shows the above points in terms of net income and capitalization rate.
As shown in the left hand graph of Fig. 1-11, reduction in utility and repair costs as a result of improved energy
saving and durability could lead to increased net income and increased income as a result of improved
productivity also could lead to increased net income.
For the capitalization rate, as shown in the right hand graph of Fig. 1-11, risk premiums peculiar to the property
and depreciation rate are added to the capitalization rate of general financial assets (long-term government
bonds, etc.). For the green property, reduction in risks related to future environment-related taxes and
environmental regulations as well as reduction in the depreciation rate as a result of improved service life could
lead to reduction in the capitalization rate (the rate before depreciation). Furthermore, the green property may
also produce the effect of improved images and reduce marketability risks.
18
markets.
The group in FY 2008 decided to study the current status of regulatory systems on property and the advanced
cases as well as property investment trends. The group conducted hearing surveys in the United States and
Europe to understand the advanced status in foreign countries and studied issues and policies required for
various stakeholders to understand and recognize the value of the environment for property. (Reference5)
Property
Expected effects
Environmental property
- Energy-saving property
- Property with green space and rooftop
gardening
- Property utilizing natural energies such as
solar and biomass, etc.
Developing conditions
Studying methods of
evaluating environmental
property in property markets
Providing necessary
information
Increasing awareness
about environmental
value in property markets
Long and
stable supply
of funds
[Investors]
- Domestic institutional
investors
- Individual investors
- Foreign investors, etc.
Supply of
good property
Promoting use
of
environmental
property
[Property companies]
- Real estate companies
- Construction
companies, etc.
- Increasing
environmental property
- Increasing
environmental value of
property
- Promoting environmental
symbiotic land use
- Improving environmental
and energy technology
[Tenants]
- General companies
- Local public
organizations, etc.
Fig. 1-12 Scheme to study developing conditions for property markets required for proliferation of
green property*Reference 6
Reference
3
A note on environmental value added for real estate (Masato Ito), Thesis report commemorating the 10th anniversary of
the Tokyo Association of Real Estate Appraisers
http: //www.tokyo-kanteishi.or.jp/sonota/rep10th.html
4
Value of property with consideration for environment is sure to increase theory and implementation of environmental
added value of property (Survey and Research Committee of Japanese Association of Real Estate Appraisal),
Jutaku-shimpo-sha
5
New business with consideration for environment !! Sustainable property foreseen by the moves of
multiplestakeholders (Sustainable Property Study Group), Gyosei Corp., 2009
6
Document Study group on value of environment in property markets
19
(2009 Edition)
2.
2.1.
Concept of manual
General description
This manual describes the importance of associating CASBEE with property appraisal first, followed by
associating CASBEE assessment items with property appraisal items. These items can be classified into overt
and potential items. This manual also describes how detailed items of the CASBEE assessment items can be
translated into pricing factors and how they can be reflected in property values. It also explains methods of
calculating property values. At the end, case studies based on this manual are presented.
By using this manual:
People in the construction industry can create CASBEE assessment score sheets simply by following
the conventional instructions of the CASBEE assessment.
People who perform property appraisal can record increase/decrease in income and capitalization rate
in environment-related items that are likely to influence the property appraisal by directly using the
score sheets.
Standard tables are available for calculating the value indicated by the income approach and the value
indicated by the sales comparison approach by using the environment-related items and the table of
increase/decrease in income and capitalization rate.
The CASBEE assessment table used by people in the construction industry is added with the pricing factor
table used by people in the property industry and, thus, various documents to be referred for appraisal purposes
can be created.
2.2.
As mentioned earlier, 16 local governments in Japan have been using CASBEE in accepting applications for
building permits, indicating that the use of CASBEE for New Construction is making steady progress. As of
March 2009, the number of assessment results reported to local governments exceeds 3,800.
However, the use and popularity of such tools as CASBEE for Existing Building and CASBEE for Renovation,
while they are already available for use, have been lagging far behind the CASBEE for New Construction.
Meanwhile, Japan currently has a huge stock of existing buildings, raising the necessity for the proliferation of
energy-saving renovations, renovations designed to cut CO2 emissions and green renovations, etc. Under such
circumstances, it is important to further promote the popularity of tools for existing buildings and renovations.
Environmental performance assessment for existing buildings and for renovated buildings can also be used for
the assessment of buildings as assets. For this reason, it is very important to simplify the criteria for
determining the necessity for renovating buildings in stock.
CASBEE assessment does not include cost and profitability assessment in the scope of its assessment.
However, demand is on the increase for using CASBEE assessment results for property appraisal. If property
transaction market participants focus more on the relationship between CASBEE items and pricing factors, the
use of CASBEE in property transaction markets and even the popularity of green buildings could increase
further.
20
2.3.
CASBEE and property appraisal were traditionally regarded as separate assessment methods and no tool to
associate them with the value evaluation point of view was developed. Fig. 2-1 shows the association between
CASBEE and property appraisal.
For appraisal of securitized property, for example, engineering reports (ER) on overt risks that are reflected in
market values including the legality of buildings, necessity and costs of renovations, existence of harmful
substances, soil contamination and earthquake risks, etc. must be developed by experts other than licensed
real estate appraisers and licensed real estate appraisers must perform property appraisal by explicitly
presenting written appraisal tables that describe their decisions and the basis for using the content of the ER for
real estate appraisal.
As CASBEE has many items that can be used for determining pricing factors, as mentioned in explaining the
background, it may be possible to develop a tool to associate them for use in property appraisal.
CASBEE Users
(Building owners, designers,
builders, manufacturers, local
governments, etc.)
Property Appraisers
(Investors, developers, licensed
real estate appraisers, etc.)
CASBEE Assessment
CASBEE
Score
Sheets*
CASBEE
Manual
*Reference is
optional.
Reference
Sheets*
Annex Tables of
Written Appraisal
for judging
pricing factors
from the related
CASBEE
Indicators
*Provision is
optional.
(This document)
Reference is
compulsory when
referring to ER.
Engineering
Report (ER)
Reference is
compulsory for
the securitized
property appraisal.
Fig. 2-1 Associating CASBEE with property appraisal (example of real estate appraisal)
21
(2009 Edition)
The tool needs to be used by a broad range of people including the current main users of CASBEE such as
building designers, building owners, builders, manufacturers and local governments as well as such market
participants as investors, developers and licensed real estate appraisers. The existing CASBEE users need to
understand the positioning and the use of property appraisal so that they understand that the tool can be used
to assess buildings as assets and to determine the necessity for renovation of buildings in stock. People
involved in property appraisal need to understand that pricing factors can also be determined by using CASBEE
assessment items just as they perform property appraisal referring to engineering reports.
Mutual understanding and collaboration will be indispensable in the future between CASBEE users and
property appraisers.
It must be noted, however, that the tool, just like written appraisal tables associated with engineering reports,
does not cover all the pricing factors for a property and should be used for analyzing some of the factors
(especially pricing factors related to environmental performance).
22
3.
3.1.
This section describes the property pricing theory based on which CASBEE is used for property appraisal and
also describes the related concepts.
As described in 1.2., the value that reflects the profitability of property, or to put it differently, the value
indicated by the income approach can be calculated by dividing the net income produced by the property (the
income after deducting the maintenance costs, taxes and insurance costs, etc, from the total incomes produced
by the property including the rent, etc.) by the capitalization rate of the property (the percentage of net income
to the amount invested in the property). Formula 1 shows the value indicated by the income approach
calculation formula (for direct capitalization method).
Net income produced by the property
Capitalization Rate
(Formula-1)
The above formula and Built Environment efficiency (BEE) formula by CASBEE are very similar. (
Fig. 3-1)
Capitarization Rate
* In the case of direct
capitalization method
BEE
Fig. 3-1 Conceptual images of value indicated by the income approach formula (for direct capitalization
method) and CASBEE environment efficiency formula (Revision of Reference7)
For example, improved environmental quality could lead to increased rent ((1) in the above figure) while
improved durability could lead to reduced repair costs and reduced depreciation ((2) in the above figure) and
energy saving could lead to reduced utility costs and reduced environmental risks ((3) in the above figure). In
addition, the sustainability ranking of the building eventually could be reflected in the effect of improved image
((4) in the above figure).
In the CASBEE formula, high environmental efficiency (BEE) can be achieved by reducing the environmental
load in the denominator while increasing the environmental quality in the numerator. This does not represent the
monetary value itself but represents the similarity of the value indicated by the income approach formula in that
the value of the property increases by increasing the cash flow amount as well as by reducing risk premiums.
c 2009 Japan Sustainable Building Consortium (JSBC)
Copyright
23
(2009 Edition)
Table 3-1 shows the relevance between CASBEE assessment items and property appraisal items. Indoor
Environment items are mainly related to the increase in the total revenues while Q2 Quality of Service items
are mainly related to the reduction in costs and the future reduction in environmental risks. Energy items that
currently attract the most attention are related to the reduction in costs and the future reduction in environmental
risks. Outdoor Environment on Site items and CASBEE ranking (BEE) contribute to the improved image. It
cannot be reflected in the present pricing but has potential for future pricing.
Table 3-1 Relevance between CASBEE assessment items and property appraisal items
CASBEE assessment items
Increased
total revenue
CASBEE Ranking
3.2.
Improved
image
Table 3-2 shows the content of the above Table 3-1 compiled from the property appraisal point of view.
Fig. 3-2 shows an image of analyzing how detailed items of CASBEE assessment items can be translated into
pricing factors and how they can be reflected in property values based on the property appraisal point of view.
This manual represents the current results of such ongoing analysis.
Table 3-2 Viewpoint of CASBEE assessment items and property appraisal items
CASBEE assessment
items
Q1
Q2
L
L1
Q3
BEE Ranking
24
Increase/Decrease in
capitalization rate
Increase/Decrease in
Expenditures
Increase/Decrease in
Revenues
CASBEE for New Construction (2007 Edition) [Exhibit A] Image of sheet to determine pricing factors based on CASBEE assessment items
XX building
Comparison
: Items that are likely to impact values
Score Sheet
Completed
Concerned categories
Total
Score
weightin
g
coefficie
nts
LR3
4.2
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.3
4.5
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
3.9
3.6
4.0
1
2 Consideration of Local Environment
2.1 Air Pollution
2.2 Heat Island Effect
2.3 Load on Local Infrastructure
1
Reduction of Rainwater Processing Lo
2
Sewage Load Suppression
3
Traffic Load Control
4
Waste Treatment Loads
3 Consideration of Surrounding (Neighborhood) Environment
3.1 Noise, Vibration & Odor
1
Noise
2
Vibration
3
Odor
3.2 Wind Damage & Sunlight Obstruction
1
Restriction of Wind Damage
2
Restriction of sunlight obstruction
3.3 Light Pollution
1
Measure for Light that Spills Outside
2
Measures for Reflected Solar from Bu
BEE Value
Increase/Decrease Value after Analyzing CASBEE Items
4.9
3.5
5.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.3
4.3
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.39
0.40
0.15
0.40
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.35
0.50
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.10
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.25
0.30
0.60
-
Increase/D
Increase/D
Increase/D ecrease in
ecrease in
Comparison
ecrease in Capitalizati
Revenues
(Multiplied
Spending
on Rate
(Multiplied
Result)
(Marked) (Addition/D
Result)
eduction)
Score
weightin
g
coefficie
nts
4.1
1.05
4.2
1.03
0.00%
1.03
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-
4.2
1.00
0.00%
1.00
1.00
4.2
Q1 Indoor Environment
1 Noise & Acoustics
1.1 Noise
-0.30%
1.02
0.00%
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
3.9
1.01
0.00%
1.01
1.00
-0.20%
1.02
1.00
4.3
Consider this
when evaluating
rental revenues
1.00
1.00
Evaluate
the 4.9
cost1.00
reduction
per3.5item1.00
separately
-
0.30
0.33
0.33
0.25
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.33
0.40
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.40
0.70
0.30
0.20
0.70
0.30
1.08
1.00
1.00
4.3
Basis
1.00
1.00
1.00
Same as 2
1.00
1.05
-0.50%
1.00
1.10
Fig. 3-2 Image sheet to determine pricing factors based on CASBEE assessment items
Reference
7
"Supplementary documents for the 8th CASBEE Open Seminar by Ito and others, July 24th, 2008, IBEC
25
(2009 Edition)
4.
4.1.
The CASBEE Property Appraisal Support Tool has been developed to support the property appraisal to be
conducted by using this manual.
This support tool is available for free download at the CASBEE web site.
<URL for free download of the CASBEE Property Appraisal Support Tool>
http://www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/download.htm
The support tool consists of the following:
To determine pricing factors from CASBEE assessment items Sheet A
To make assessment by reflecting the above results in the value indicated by the income approach (direct
capitalization method) Sheet B
To make assessment by reflecting the above results in the sales comparison approach Sheet C
Fig. 4-1 shows the assessment workflow.
(1) First, perform the environmental performance assessment of the building by using the CASBEE
assessment tool.
(2) Transfer the CASBEE scores to Sheet A of the support tool and determine pricing factors while reviewing
the score of each of the relevant assessment items.
(3) Perform the real estate appraisal by using Sheet B and Sheet C by reflecting the results of Sheet A on
them.
4.2.
This section describes the method of linking CASBEE assessment items to determination of pricing factors for
property.
First, it should be noted that pricing factors consist of factors already reflected in market values (overt factors)
and potential factors that are yet to be reflected in market values or factors that should be reflected in market
values in the future (potential factors). The potential factors should not be included in the real estate appraisal,
as the property appraisal is an act of indicating the market value of the property in monetary value. However, it
is also important for property market participants to make investment decisions from long-term perspectives
including the potential factors.
The property appraisal including the analysis of potential factors may include voluntary appraisals by market
participants for their investment decisions and price investigation reports for which licensed real estate
appraisers perform for specific purposes.
26
Overt factors
Potential factors
Reflection in market
values
Application to real
estate appraisal
Application to price
investigation reports
by licensed real
estate appraisers
Long-term
investment
decisions by
property market
participants
The subsections below describe CASBEE assessment items in view of each of the overt and potential factors.
(1) Improved environmental quality (Q-1~Q-3) and increased rents, etc.
i. Relevance with overt factors
The impact should be understood and analyzed through comparison of examples of property for rent and/or
through hearing surveys with tenant brokers, etc. See References 1.2. for the method of the analysis.
ii. Relevance with potential factors
There may be some cases where the relationship between the environmental quality and rent fees cannot be
clearly identified in areas where property to be assessed are located. In such an event, the rates of potential
increases in rent should be estimated by referring to the general relationship (See References 1.2.2.)
between scoring and the unit price of rent.
There are many potential factors that increase property values such as natural lights, natural ventilation,
relaxation spaces, preservation of the biological environment, etc., but they are not overt factors (See
References 1.1.(2)). Information to be provided in the future by the Intellectual Productivity Research
Committee can also be used as reference for these factors.
(2)-1 Improved durability (Q-2) and reduced repair costs, etc.
i. Relevance with overt factors
Factors that can identify estimated repair costs, etc. and can be reflected in estimated cash flows may be
classified as overt factors.
ii. Relevance with potential factors
If estimated repair costs, etc. cannot be identified, data on lifecycle costs per environmental consideration
item should be amassed to understand and analyze the trends.
(2)-2 Improved durability (Q-2) and reduced depreciation ratio
i. Relevance with overt factors
If the durable years of the materials of the building including the structural frame are available and the
differences in the depreciation ratio with the durable years of standard materials can be calculated, such
factors may be classified as overt factors. In such an event, the factors should be quantified by understanding
the percentage of composition between the land and the building (structural frame and facilities) and the
durable years.
ii. Relevance with potential factors
If the durable years of the materials are not available, data on durable years of the same material should be
amassed to understand and analyze the trends.
(3)-1 Energy saving (LR-1) and reduced utility costs
i. Relevance with overt factors
The utility costs should be estimated based on the specifications of the facilities. If the estimated costs can be
reflected in the cash flows, they may be classified as overt factors.
ii. Relevance with potential factors
If the utility costs cannot be estimated, such indicators as PAL and ERR, etc. and such data as reduced
energy costs should be amassed to understand and analyze the trends.
27
(2009 Edition)
4.3.
See Case Study Sheet B for application to the value indicated by the income approach (the direct
capitalization method).
For increase or decrease in revenues, the multiplied results of increased or decreased values on Sheet A
should be reflected in the evaluation of revenues.
For increase or decrease in costs, as it is difficult to reflect numerical values directly on Sheet A, costs in items
that could affect the increase or decrease in costs (represented by D on Sheet A) should be evaluated.
For increase or decrease in capitalization rates, added or deducted results of increased or decreased values on
Sheet A should be reflected in Increase or decrease by CASBEE factors of the capitalization rate evaluation
table on the Direct Capitalization Method Sheet.
The calculation principles are shown in the table below.
Increase/decrease
Type of
factor
Improved thermal
comfort
Revenues
Overt
Revenues
Overt
Improved quality of
service
Revenues
Overt
Improved reliability
Capitalization rate
Overt
Reduced
pre-depreciation yield
as a result of increased
service life
Capitalization rate
Overt
Increased/
decreased
value
Increased
by about
XX%
Increased
by about
XX%
Increased
by about
XX%
Decreased
by XX P
Decreased
by XXP
Reason
Based on comparison of rent cases and the
opinions of tenant brokers
Based on comparison of rent cases and the
opinions of tenant brokers
Based on comparison of rent cases and the
opinions of tenant brokers
Improved durability as a result of using the
seismic response control structure and
stabilized tenant demands were taken into
consideration for the evaluation.
The difference in the depreciation rate
between the service life of 50 years and 100
years each was calculated assuming the
percentage of the building value is at 0.3
and the percentage of the structural frame is
at 0.7.
(10.30.750)-(10.30.7100)
28
Capitalization rate
Comprehensive effect
of the above items
Value indicated by
the income approach
by the direct
capitalization method
4.4.
Potential
Decreased
by XX P
XX%
See Case Study Sheet C for application to the sales comparison approach.
The sales comparison approach is used, in many cases, only for land in the current real estate appraisal. It is
rarely used for transactions that combine buildings (houses for rent such as tenant buildings, etc.) and the sites.
However, this approach can also be effective as transaction prices are often determined based on the unit price
per total floor area or rental area (dedicated to rent) in the property investment markets.
As the direct capitalization method considers the percentage of each of the CASBEE assessment items:
increase/decrease in revenues, increase/decrease in costs and increase/decrease in capitalization rates,
the theoretical percentage of increase/decrease in values can also be estimated based on the outcomes of the
method. (See the Comparison column on Case Study Sheet A.)
The sales comparison approach for buildings and sites combined, as mentioned earlier, is not yet a popular real
estate appraisal method. And as it employs theoretical increase/decrease in values, it may be suited more for
price investigation reports by licensed real estate appraisers and voluntary assessments by investors rather
than for real estate appraisal.
29
(2009 Edition)
4.5.
4.5.1.
Transferring CASBEE assessment results
First, the applicable CASBEE assessment results should be transferred into this support tool.
View
Transfer
Clear
On the main screen, select from the pull-down menu a version (2008 or 2006 version) of the assessment
software.
Then, on the score sheet of the assessment software, specify an area of the results to be transferred, and copy
& paste the specified area to inside the area marked in red on the Score Transfer Sheet. For items outside the
red-marked area, transfer necessary information to each of the cells marked in light blue.
On PCs equipped with macro functions, specify files that contain data to be transferred by pressing the View
button on the main screen and click the Transfer button to automatically transfer the necessary information
and scores to the support tool.
Clear
30
4.5.2.
CASBEE assessment results transferred are indicated on the left side of Sheet A Analyzing pricing factors by
CASBEE score sheet. The factors should be analyzed by reviewing the results and should be entered into the
Items Used for Appraisal and the Reasons column (in blue cells on the right).
(1) Increase/Decrease in Revenues
For example, an item that is expected to see a 1% increase in rent should be entered as 1.01. The multiplied
results of major items (Q, L and rankings), middle items (Q1, Q2, L1,L2 levels), minor items (1,2 levels)
and the result of the total tally are displayed.
(2) Increase/Decrease in spending
The symbol U (up) or D (down) instead of numerical values should be entered for cost evaluation.
(3) Increase/Decrease in capitalization rate
Increase/decrease should be entered by +/- XX% per item. The added or deducted results of major, middle and
minor items and the result of the total tally are indicated.
(4) About Comparison
For example, in view of increase/decrease in revenues, increase/decrease in spending, increase/decrease in
capitalization rate and other effects, an item that is expected to see a 1% increase in value should be entered as
1.01. The multiplied results of major, middle and minor items and the result of the total tally are displayed.
(Omitted)
Fig. 4-4 Sheet A Analyzing pricing factors by CASBEE score sheet (Excerpt)
4.5.3.
Property appraisal
The results of pricing factor analysis of environmental performance by using CASBEE assessed in the
previously-mentioned Sheet A Analyzing pricing factors by CASBEE score sheet are quoted by Sheet B
Value indicated by the income approach (direct capitalization method) and Sheet C sales comparison
31
(2009 Edition)
approach. Property appraisal should be performed (by entering in blue cells) based on the Value indicated by
the income approach (the direct capitalization method) or the sales comparison approach while reviewing the
results.
Clear
(Omitted)
Link with Sheet A
Fig. 4-5 Sheet B Value indicated by the income approach (direct capitalization method) (excerpt)
[Sheet C] Sales comparison approach
0
Note The sales comparison approach is not necessarily popular for appraisal of land and buildings combined,
but is described for reference purposes as an example of appraisals including potential pricing factors, etc.
General description
Transaction
date
Transaction
price
()
Address:
Clear
Standardization Regional
Circumstantial Time
factors
adjustment
adjustment adjustment
comparison
()
()
(d)
(e)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Difference in
building
quality
adjustment
(f)
Individual
factor
CASBEE
Individual
factor
Other
than (g)
100
100
100
100
(g)
(h)
Comparative
price
XXX
100
100
10,000yen/m2
Link with
Sheet A
Built in Year XX
Address:
ab
e
XXX
May 2009
10,000 yen/ m2
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
June 2009
10,000 yen/ m2
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Address:
XXX
10,000 yen/
Fig. 4-6
32
4.5.4.
Notes
i. As shown in Fig. 2-1, the work of linking the CASBEE scoring sheet with the property appraisal by using this
manual is basically discretionary.
ii. The sheets of the support tool shown in this manual are an example and can be modified at the appraisers
own discretion. As appraisers usually have their own forms for the direct capitalization method and sales
comparison approach, etc., appraisers can replace them with their own.
iii. This manual and the support tool are provided solely for the purpose of showing the concept of performing
property appraisal by using CASBEE, and appraisers must determine each numerical value and the basis at
their own responsibility.
iv. Appraisers must abide by relevant laws and standards including laws on real estate appraisal and real estate
appraisal standards and other notes and guidelines, etc. in the event of using this manual and the support tool.
33
(2009 Edition)
5.
It has been so far explained the concept of this manual, the relevance with property appraisal, the theory of
environmental added value of property and potential applications to future assessment methods, etc. This
chapter describes applications of assessment methods described in the previous chapters based on one model
case.
This model case assumes that the assessment purpose is to make long-term investment decisions. For this
purpose, both the overt and the potential factors as explained in 4.2. will be considered. This model case, in
summary, is assumed to be Table 4-1 Price investigation reports by licensed real estate appraisers.
5.1.
[Display of land]
Location
Lot number
District number XXX
XXX XXX XXX Ward, Tokyo XXXXX
Building site
Percentage of fee simple co-ownership of the above: 69/100
Registered area
3,400 m2
5.2.
5.2.1.
To understand the regional environment of the area to which the property belongs, it is necessary to consider
the scope of influence the planned building will have, the regional vegetation and the ecosystem as well as the
usage of the land, etc.
For this survey, the scope was defined as the whole XX Ward in Tokyo by taking into consideration the usage
and the size, etc. of the planned building and the fact that environmental data such as the locations of off-shores
and distribution of vegetation, etc. are readily available.
5.2.2.
A) Current status of land usage and the ratio of green coverage, etc.
According to the Basic Policy of XX Ward, while XX Ward has abundant green areas such as temples, shrines
and gardens, the ratio of green coverage is only about 18%. XX Ward faces Tokyo Bay, but the entire shore is
covered by artificial sea walls. While the boom for large-scale development projects for business offices has
somewhat subdued, the number of multi-family building constructions remains high based on the trend of
people returning to live downtown from the suburbs, reducing the ratio of green coverage.
B) Status of regional vegetation
According to the Handbook of Japanese Vegetation (Akira Miyawaki, Shibundo Publishing), this area belongs
to Tokyo Bay Area and the potential natural vegetation where vegetation peculiar to the entire natural
environment is available and the ability of the area is classified as the Machilus Group where the evergreen
broad-leaved trees of machilus dominate the high tree layer. However, such vegetation remains only in limited
places such as gardens, etc.
c 2009 Japan Sustainable Building Consortium (JSBC)
Copyright
34
Some of the recent redevelopment projects including those in the neighboring wards include measures to
restore such vegetation, but some of the tree-planting measures include many foreign species.
C) Status of ecosystem
It is difficult at a glance to observe the natural ecosystem in this area where highly mature commercial and
business districts or high-rising residential building districts are located. However, according to the Basic Policy
of XX Ward, the quality of the seawater is improving as a result of proliferation of the sewage system. Various
fishes including goby, conger eels, large-eyed herrings, rockfish, greenlings, gray mullets, and sea bass can be
observed along the shore. For birds, while the majority of birds observed are those commonly seen in cities
such as jungle crows, sparrows, bulbuls, gray starlings, etc., black-headed gulls, Japanese wagtails, spotbill
ducks, etc. can also be observed often at watersides and white-eyes, great tits and Japanese pygmy
woodpeckers at gardens and temples/shrines.
However, no raptores such as goshawks, kestrels, and owls, which inhabit more sophisticated ecosystems, can
be observed, allowing jungle crows to thrive without their natural enemy and to make a mess of garbage
collection sites, which has given rise to a major social issue. Thus, the ecosystem pyramid is in an incomplete
shape.
D) Status of air and heat island
The issue of sea breezes blocked by groups of high-rising buildings and the issue of the heat island
phenomenon in inner land associated with it have also been increasingly pointed out.
5.2.3.
As mentioned in the Basic Policy of XX Ward, the future direction of the regional environment should be to
improve the air pollution and the heat island phenomenon and restore the natural ecosystem by restoring the
natural vegetation of the area, preserving large green areas such as temples/shrines and gardens and
developing green networks that link such green areas with roads, shores, rivers and developed land.
5.2.4.
Status of property
(1) Land
The site conditions are as follows:
Table 5-1 Conditions for site
Local transportation
system
Street
Administrative
requirement
Supply/treatment
systems
Buried cultural assets
and their status
Soil contamination and
the status
Plot requirement
Others
35
(2009 Edition)
together with Tokyo Bay and the neighboring gardens, it is also necessary to create corridors for sea breezes
and to plan the introduction of regional vegetation.
(2) Building
The building is a new construction to be completed in XX, 200X. Based on the instructions of the building owner,
the plan includes more green specifications than the normal building specifications. The highlights of such
specifications are as follows:
36
Major item
Individual air-conditioning
Lights
Cogeneration system
Ice thermal storage system
Highly efficient turbo refrigerator
Water saving
Long life cycle
Eco-material
37
(2009 Edition)
5.3.
Relationship between the most effective usage of property in view of the environment and
the planned usage
As a result of considerations for 5.2.3. Right direction of regional environment and 5.2.4. Status of property, it
was determined the property can be used most effectively as an green large-scale building with offices and
shops and achieving the status of the most effective use is feasible.
5.4.
Analyzing environmental added value factors by CASBEE and applying methods of the
surveyed value
The surveyed value of the property was determined by the cost approach, sales comparison approach and
income capitalization method (direct capitalization method and DCF method). As the property has already gone
through the scoring of environmental performances by CASBEE, the environmental added value factors were
also analyzed by using the CASBEE scoring sheet.
5.4.1.
As the CASBEE scoring sheet comprehensively covers items related to improving the environmental quality of
green buildings (indoor environment, quality of service, outdoor environment) and to reducing environmental
loads (energy, resources & materials, off-site environment), pricing factors were analyzed by using the score.
The results of the analysis are shown in [Sheet A] Table 5-7. The following elements were included in applying a
method to determine surveyed values.
Effect of increase in revenues
5%
Effect of spending cut
Yes (the specific amount should be evaluated separately)
Effect of capitalization rate reduction -0.5%
5.4.2.
Amount
Amount of green
specifications
Note
Main body
5,600,000,000
48,000,000
Electricity
900,000,000
15,000,000
400,000,000
207,000,000
Air-conditioning
Elevator
Exterior
Total
1,000,000,000
300,000,000
100,000,000
8,300,000,000
12,000,000
282,000,000
38
Increase/de
crease
Increased/de
creased
value
Increased by
about 2%
Improved thermal
comfort
Revenues
Revenues
Increased by
about 1%
Improved quality of
service
Revenues
Increased by
about 2%
Improved reliability
Capitalizatio
n rate
Decreased
by 0.1P
Reduced
pre-depreciation
capitalization rate as
a result of increased
life cycle
Excluding risk
premium on possible
enhancement in
CO2 emissions
control in the future
Capitalizatio
n rate
Decreased
by 0.2P
Capitalizatio
n rate
Decreased
by 0.2P
Reason
The precise air-conditioning control at 28 zones of the standard
floor was evaluated by taking into consideration the opinions of
tenant brokers, etc.
The precise air-conditioning control at 20 zones of the standard
floor was evaluated by taking into consideration the opinions of
tenant brokers, etc.
The large capacity electric outlet of 60VA and the ceiling height of
3,000mm were evaluated by taking into consideration the opinions
of tenant brokers, etc.
Improved durability as a result of using the seismic response
control structure and stabilized tenant demands were taken into
consideration for the evaluation.
For the service life of over 100 years, the difference in depreciation
between the service life of 50 years and 100 years each was
calculated, assuming that the percentage of the building value is at
0.3 and the percentage of the structural frames is at 0.7.
(10.30.750) - (10.30.7100)
The energy consumption in the case of the normal specifications is
75,000GJ (2.1GJ/), which can be translated into over 1,500kl in
crude oil. For this reason, it is likely the property is subject to the
environmental protection ordinance of the Tokyo Metropolitan
government, which obligates certain businesses to reduce the total
amount of CO2 emissions. On the assumption that the CO2
emissions must be reduced by about 800t, which is about 25% of
the about 3200t-CO2 emitted by the normal specifications and that
a Green Power Certificate worth about 800t must be purchased,
the risk of loss in revenue could be about 40 million yen per year.
The amount was converted into the risk premium.*
39
(2009 Edition)
Comprehensive
effect of the above
items
Value
indicated by
the income
approach by
the direct
capitalizatio
n method
+19%
See Exhibit.
*This is different calculation basis from Tokyo Cap-and-Trade Program of Tokyo Metropolitan Government. Please refer to the latest
information when implementing an assessment.
Energy saving
Exterior
Base lighting at exclusive
area
Lighting
Lighting at toilet
Air-conditioning
Ventilation
Heat source
Low glass
Daylight control/initial lighting
adjustment
Turning on/off lights by human
detection sensors
Natural ventilation/night purge
Complex heat sources (turbo +
absorption + cogeneration)
Sub-total
Amount of reduction in
energy
2,460
GJ/year
2,350
GJ/year
300
GJ/year
3,920
GJ/year
12,260
GJ/year
21,290
GJ/year
5.0%
Property with
normal spec.
5.5%
-0.2P
+0.3P
+0.3P
5.3%
-0.5p
5.6%
-0.5P
4.5%
4.8%
Reason
Evaluated by the direct capitalization
method
Possible reduction in revenues already
reflected in the cash flow
Uncertainty over revenue projections after
the retaining period ended was reflected.
d=a+b+c
Stable revenues based on periodic building
lease contracts were considered.
f=a+b+e
The DCF method Note) also produced an added value of about +17% as the direct capitalization method did.
iii. Value indicated by the income approach
Based on the above, the following values were produced:
Value indicated by the income approach by the direct capitalization method: 27,209,000,000 yen
Value indicated by the income approach by the DCF method:
26,963,000,000 yen
Both of the values are almost equal, which confirms that the value calculated by the DCF method can be
verified by the value calculated by the direct capitalization method, which tends to be more substantiative.
Based on the above, the value indicated by the income approach was estimated at 27,000,000,000 yen.
40
5.4.4.
Applying sales comparison approach
Appropriate cases are selected after collecting many transaction cases of houses for rent and their sites that are
similar to the model property, and their transaction values, if necessary, are adjusted according to the
circumstances and the timing of the transactions, and then, values produced after comparing regional factors
and individual factors are compared to calculate the estimated value of the property.
The sales comparison approach for houses for rent and their sites is not necessarily used generally for the
property appraisal. However, the method is applied in this report as cases of sophisticated office buildings for
rent that are similar to the model case are available from buildings owned by property investment companies.
For environmental consideration items, as the impact on value indicated by the income approach (increased
revenues, reduced costs, reduced capitalization rates, etc.), which was considered on [Sheet A] CASBEE
scoring sheet can be used also for considering the impact on the value itself, the [Sheet A] also calculated the
comparative percentage (percentage of increased/decreased values) of individual factors of CASBEE.
As a result of adjustment according to the circumstances and the timing of the transactions, regional factors and
individual factors (differences in grades of land and buildings) as stated in the [Sheet C] Table 5-11 as well as
the consideration for individual factors of CASBEE, the value indicated by the sales comparison approach of the
property was calculated at 27,200,000,000 yen (1,510,000 yen per area for rent).
Note)
It stands for Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. It is a method of producing an indicated value by the following procedure:
define the assumed retaining period of a property by investors (10 years in this case study) and predict the net income (net
cash flow) to be produced during the retaining period and the resale value at the end of the retaining period (after deducting
sales costs) and, then, apply a discount rate to both the net income and the resale value to calculate the current values and,
then, aggregate them to produce the indicated value. For the capitalization rate, while the direct capitalization method
employs the capitalization rate, the DCF method employs the discount rate and the final capitalization rate (the capitalization
rate used for calculating the resale value). In this case study, as shown in Table 5-6, the discount rate and the final
capitalization rate are calculated by considering the future uncertainty about the capitalization rate and the revenue stability
during the retaining period, etc.
Q1
1.05
4.2
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.3
4.5
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
3.9
3.6
4.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.2
4.6
4.0
5.0
5.0
3.7
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
5.0
0.40
0.15
0.40
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.35
0.50
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.10
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.25
0.30
0.60
0.40
0.30
0.40
0.60
0.15
0.70
0.30
0.25
0.25
0.50
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.30
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.50
0.50
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-
4.2
3.9
4.3
4.2
4.2
1.03
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.00
1.01
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.02
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.03
1.08
Basis
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
-0.30%
4.1
[Exhibit A] Image of sheet to determine pricing factors based on CASBEE assessment items
1
Background noise level
2
Equipment noise
1.2 Sound Insulation
Securing External Wall Performance (T-2)
1
Sound Insulation of Openings
2
Sound Insulation of Partition Walls
Sound Insulation Performance of Floor Slabs (light-we
3
Sound Insulation Performance of Floor Slabs (heavy-w
4
1.3 Sound Absorption
2 Thermal Comfort
2.1 Room Temperature Control
1
Room Temperature Setting
2
Variable Loads and Following-up Cont
Using LOW- Glass
3
Perimeter Performance
Standard Floor Zone VAV28
4
Zoned Control
5
Temperature and Humidity Control Controlled by Sensors Installed Per Zone
6
Individual Control
7
Non-regular Hour Air-conditioning
8
Monitoring Systems
2.2 Humidity Control
2.3 Type of Air Conditioning System
3 Lighting & Illumination
3.1 Daylighting
1
Daylight Factor
2
Openings by Orientation
3
Daylight Devices
3.2 Anti-glare Measures
1
Glare from Light Fixtures
2
Daylight Control
3.3 Illuminance Level
Up to 1200Lx by Specifications (Dimmed to 700Lx by Sensors)
1
Illuminance
2
Uniformity of Illuminance
Precise Zoning by Sensors
3.4 Lighting Controllability
4 Air Quality
4.1 Source Control
1
Chemical Pollutants
2
Asbestos
3
Mites, Mold etc
4
Legionella
4.2 Ventilation
Using Natural Ventilation on Standard Floor
1
Ventilation Rate
2
Natural Ventilation Performance
3
Consideration for Outside Air Intake Different External Walls for Air Intake and Discharge
4
Air Supply Planning
4.3 Operation Plan
CO2 Monitoring
1
2
Control of Smoking
Indoor Environment
1 Noise & Acoustics
1.1 Noise
Concerned categories
(2009 Edition)
41
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.20
0.50
0.50
4.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.40
Energy
LR1
Implementing Such Efforts as Open Spaces, Tree-planting, Joint efforts with Shiodome Town
Development Council
0.30
0.50
0.50
0.30
0.40
3.0
0.30
0.40
0.60
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.40
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.31
0.48
0.80
0.20
0.33
0.23
0.23
0.09
0.23
0.23
0.19
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.29
0.31
0.60
0.40
0.31
0.38
0.17
0.17
0.11
0.11
0.22
0.22
0.30
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.1
4.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
4.3
5.0
3.0
5.0
3.5
3.2
3.0
4.0
3.6
5.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.4
4.6
5.0
4.0
5.0
3.9
4.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
1
Provision of Space & Storage
2
Use of Advanced Information System Electric Outlet Capacity 60VA/
3
Barrier-free Planning
1.2 Amenity
Height of Ceiling 3000mm
Perceived Spaciousness & Access to View
1
2
Space for Refreshment
3
Dcor Planning
2 Durability & Reliability
2.1 Earthquake Resistance
1
Earthquake-resistance
2
Seismic Isolation & Vibration Damping Seismic Response Control Structure
2.2 Service Life of Components
Service Life of Over 100 Years by Specifications
Service Life of Structural Frame Materials
1
Necessary Refurbishment Interval for Exterior
2
Necessary Renewal Interval for Main Interior F
3
Necessary Renewal Interval of Replacing Pipes
4
Necessary Renewal Interval for Major Equipment and Services
5
2.4 Reliability
1
HVAC System
2
Water Supply & Drainage
3
Electrical Equipment
4
Support Method of Machines & Ducts
5
Communications & IT Equipment
3 Flexibility & Adaptability
3.1 Spatial Margin
1
Allowance for Floor-to-floor Height Floor-to-Floor Height 4350mm
2
Adaptability of Floor Layout
3.2 Floor Load Margin
3.3 Adaptability of Facilities
1
Ease of Air Conditioning Duct Renewa
Ease of Water Supply and Drain Pipe Renewal
2
3
Ease of Electrical Wiring Renewal
Ease of Communications Cable Renewal
4
5
Ease of Equipment Renewal
6
Provision of Backup Space
Quality of Service
1 Service Ability
1.1 Functionality & Usability
Q3
Q2
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.0
4.7
4.0
4.0
5.0
3.0
4.1
4.4
3.5
4.1
4.0
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00%
1.02
1.00
1.00
0.00%
-0.20%
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00%
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00%
-0.20%
1.00
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.01
-0.10%
1.03
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.01
1.00
1.05
1.02
1.00
-0.30%
0.00%
-0.30%
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.01
1.00
1.02
42
CASBEE Property Appraisal Manual
(2009 Edition)
Fire Retardant
Insulation Materials
Refrigerants
1
2
3
4
Off-site Environment
1 Consideration of Global Warming
2 Consideration of Local Environment
2.1 Air Pollution
2.2 Heat Island Effect
2.3 Load on Local Infrastructure
1
2
3
1
Rainwater Use System
2
Gray Water Reuse System
2 Reducing Usage of Non-renewable Resources
2.1 Reducing Usage of Materials
2.2 Continuing Use of Existing Building Skeleton etc
1
Noise
2
Vibration
Installing Deodorizer at Kitchen Ventilation
3
Odor
3.2 Wind Damage & Sunlight Obstruction
1
Restriction of Wind Damage
2
Restriction of sunlight obstruction
3.3 Light Pollution
1
Light that Spills Outside
2
Daylight Reflected by External Wall of
BEE Value
Increase/Decrease Value After Analyzing CASBEE Items
LR3
LR2
0.15
0.40
0.60
0.67
0.33
0.63
0.07
0.24
0.20
0.20
0.05
0.24
0.22
0.32
0.68
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.30
0.33
0.33
0.25
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.33
0.40
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.40
0.70
0.30
0.20
0.70
0.30
4.9
3.5
5.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.3
4.3
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.39
0.30
3.6
4.0
3.3
3.0
4.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.2
3.0
3.3
4.0
3.0
3.0
4.3
4.9
3.5
4.2
3.2
3.0
3.6
3.1
1.00
1.00
1.05
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
-0.50%
-0.20%
-0.20%
0.00%
1.00
1.00
1.10
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00
Same as 2
(2009 Edition)
43
44
Table 58 Profit value of the model case (by direct capitalization method, Sheet B)
Items
1 Rent
1,737,481
3 Utility costs
6 Operating earnings
98,496
4 Parking lot
5 Others
1,000
1,836,977
7 Taxes
170,000
8 Maintenance costs
144,000
98,496
25,920
32,400
8,100
8,100
446,516
477,620
11 Insurance premium
12 Operating expenses
OEROperating
13
expenses/operating income
14 Net operating income
15 Profit from operating deposits (+)
16 Capital expenses (-)
17 Net income
18 Capitalization rate
The value indicated by the
19 income approach using the
direct capitalization method
(comparison with PaU)
Calculation basis
(in comparison between DP and PaU)
24.3%
27.0% (126)
1,390,461
1,288,100 (6-12)
30,000
1,360,461
1,258,100
5.00%
5.50%
27,209,000
22,875,000 (1718)
119
100
Property with
Property to
Configuration basis
normal
be assessed
specifications
5.50%
-0.20%
0.00%
0.20%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
-0.50%
5.00%
5.50%
45
(2009 Edition)
Final
capitalization rate
5.30%
5.60%
2.00%
2.00%
Discount rate
Basis of assessment
Removing environmental risk of property with normal
specifications (-0.2P). Consideration for income stability
through periodic building lease contracts (-0.5P for
each)
Assessing with the capitalization rate (after removing the
environmental risk for a property with normal
specifications) of around +0.3% by taking into
consideration the uncertainties, etc, over predicted
income at the end of the holding period.
Rate of property brokerage fee, etc. (by taking the sizes
into consideration)
The utility costs are assumed to increase 2% per year from the 5th year.
The rent and other incomes and operating expenses (excluding the utility) are assumed to increase 1% per year from the
5th year.
46
Rent
Common area charges
Utility costs (exclusive area)
Parking
Other
Operating income
Taxes
Maintenance and management fee
Utility costs (exclusive area)
Utility costs (common area)
Insurance premium
Operating expenses
OER (operating expenses/operating
income)
Operating income
Profit from operating deposits (+)
Capital expenses (-)
Net income
Present value rate
Present value of net income
Net income at sales
Recoverable price
Transfer costs
Recoverable value
Present value rate
1
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
2
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
3
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
4
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
5
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
6
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
7
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
8
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
9
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
10
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
11
1,737,481
0
98,496
0
1,000
1,836,977
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
170,000
144,000
98,496
25,920
8,100
446,516
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
24.3%
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
1,390,461
30,000
1,360,461
0.95694
1,301,877
30,000
1,360,461
0.91573
1,245,815
30,000
1,360,461
0.87630
1,192,167
30,000
1,360,461
0.83856
1,140,830
30,000
1,360,461
0.80245
1,091,703
30,000
1,360,461
0.76790
1,044,692
30,000
1,360,461
0.73483
999,705
30,000
1,360,461
0.70319
956,656
30,000
1,360,461
0.67290
915,460
30,000
30,000
1,360,461 1,360,461
0.64393 Total of present value of net income
10,764,944
876,038
1,360,461
25,669,075
513,381
25,155,693
0.64393
16,198,447
10,764,944
26,963,000
Rent
Common area charges
Utility costs (exclusive area)
Parking
Other
Operating income
Taxes
Maintenance and management fee
Utility costs (exclusive area)
Utility costs (common area)
Insurance premium
Carbon credit Trading
Operating expenses
OER (operating expenses/operating
income)
Operating income
Profit from operating deposits (+)
Capital expenses (-)
Net income
Present value rate
Present value of net income
Net income at sales
Recoverable price
Transfer costs
Recoverable value
Present value rate
1
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
2
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
3
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
4
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
5
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
6
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
7
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
8
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
9
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
10
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
11
1,641,600
0
123,120
0
1,000
1,765,720
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
477,620
477,620
477,620
477,620
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
12,800
490,420
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
12,800
490,420
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
12,800
490,420
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
12,800
490,420
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
12,800
490,420
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
40,000
517,620
170,000
144,000
123,120
32,400
8,100
40,000
517,620
27.0%
27.0%
27.0%
27.0%
27.8%
27.8%
27.8%
27.8%
27.8%
29.3%
29.3%
1,288,100
1,288,100
1,288,100
1,288,100
1,275,300
1,275,300
1,275,300
1,275,300
1,275,300
1,248,100
1,248,100
30,000
1,258,100
0.95420
1,200,477
30,000
1,258,100
0.91049
1,145,493
30,000
1,258,100
0.86879
1,093,028
30,000
1,258,100
0.82900
1,042,966
30,000
1,245,300
0.07910
985,071
30,000
1,245,300
0.75480
939,953
30,000
1,245,300
0.72023
896,902
30,000
1,245,300
0.68724
855,823
30,000
1,245,300
0.65577
816,625
30,000
30,000
1,218,100 1,218,100
0.62573 Total of present value of net income
9,738,540
762,202
1,218,100
21,751,786
435,036
21,316,750
0.62573
13,338,536
9,738,540
23,077,000
(3)
(2)
(1)
No.
Built
in Year XX
Address:
XXX
Built in Year XX
Address: XXX
Built in Year XX
Address: XXX
General description
July
2008
20
August
2008
208
August
2008
208
Transaction date
100
95
100
95
100
(f)
building quality
adjustment
(f)
110
100
110
CASBEE
(g)
CASBEE
(g)
100
100
100
(h)
(h)
(g)
1,508,000
yen/m2
1,508,000/
Individual factor ab
Difference in
Individual
factor
1,600,000/
1,600,000 yen/ m2
100
100
96
100
100
100
97
100
100
100
100
110
100
100
100
100
100
100
110
100
100
100
100
1,536,000/
1,536,000 yen/ m2
1,493,800/
100
98
100
(e)
Regional
factors
comparison
(e)
1,493,800 yen/ m2
100
100
100
(d)
Standardization
adjustment
(d)
1,400,000/
97
()
Time
adjustment
(c)
100
()
Circumstantial
adjustment
(b)
1,400,000 yen/ m2
1,250,000
yen/ m2
1,250,000/
()
Transaction
value
(a)
Table 5-11 Price evaluation in model case (Market comparison approach Sheet C)
1,510,000/
1,510,000 yen/ m2
Value indicated
by the sales
comparison
approach
(2009 Edition)
47
48
5.5.
49
(2009 Edition)
6.
All the countries in the world including Japan have been accelerating their efforts for the post-Kyoto Protocol
agreement including requests and efforts for a low-carbon society. However, the past energy consumption
records indicate that energy consumption continues to increase sharply in the private sector with no sign of
abatement. Efforts for a low-carbon society in this sector are crucial, and the private sector should play a central
role in realizing a low-carbon society. To that end, the private-sector building markets such as offices and
houses should be designed in a way that reflects green in property values and promotes green properties to the
whole society. Mechanisms and tools to visualize such systems are urgently required.
Based on these backgrounds, this manual describes the national and international trends on the property
appraisal at the beginning, followed by the property appraisal manual in the main section of the document. In
the conclusion, this manual describes issues surrounding property appraisal in the low-carbon era.
<Future issues>
(1) Clarification and addition of overt items: Partially modify or add names of items that overtly impact the
property appraisal so that people in the property industry can easily understand. Such items include
assessment of security and sites, etc.
(2) Turning items potentially impacting property appraisal into overt items: Turn CASBEE assessment items that
potentially impact the property appraisal into overt items and develop effective tools. Such items include
tree-planting at sites, preserving the eco-system, bio-diversity, landscape in harmony with the townscape,
intellectual productivity, etc. However, doing so requires verifications and time.
(3) Database of CASBEE assessment-based property appraisal cases: Create a database of case verifications
and study models.
i. Comparison between CASBEE scoring and rent (per area): Create a statistical database of CASBEE
rankings and rent in the same area of the same city.
ii. Comparison between CASBEE scoring and rent (per building): Compare specifications, environmental
performances and rent in the same district. Create a database of cash flow items such as energy
costs, maintenance and management costs and the stability of such items.
iii. Conduct opinion surveys among stakeholders.
iv. Expand verifications of model cases and increase the number of model cases.
(4) Proposing to foreign countries: Propose, discuss and improve this proposal for overseas use. Try to make
mutual use or unify with proposals from overseas.
(5) Developing mechanisms to share the values of green investment: Study how to develop and proliferate
mechanisms to share the values of green investment such as a mechanism for properly sharing the benefits
of energy-saving renovations between owners and tenants, etc. (See Fig. 6-1 for Limited Liability
Partnership)
(6) Developing common tools: Continue to develop common tools between the building and the property
industries (CASBEE and property appraisal manual for property appraisal use, a tool for the building
industry to find from CASBEE assessment results any impact on the property appraisal, etc.)
50
Building owner
Building owner
Energy-saving project
Limited Liability Partnership
(Members: owners, tenants)
Tenants
Tenants
Distribution of profit/loss based
on amount of reduced costs on
exclusive space
ESCO costs
Energy cost
billing/payment
Energy cost
billing/payment
Procuring funds
Financial
institution
ESCO provider
Principal/interest
Building owner
Energy
company
Credit enhancement
51
(2009 Edition)
References
1.
1.1.
52
Fig. 1-1
53
(2009 Edition)
54
Importance of environmentally-friendly
items for tenants of office buildings for rent
DI
(Importance DI)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
72.0
68.9
2) Zoned control of2
room temperature
58.1
3
3) Humidity
control
4) Use of4
daylight
(daylighting)
Indoor
environmental
comfort
41.9
5) Lighting
(Glare
from Light Fixtures/Uniformity
5
of Illuminance)
6) Natural 6
ventilation
65.5
38.5
Control of smoking
77)
67.6
78.7
9) Electric 9
outlet capacity
75.3
10)
OA floor
10OA
76.7
11)
Barrier-free
11
47.0
30.1
73.0
75.0
43.6
Outdoor
on
environment
site
6.8
22.3
19) Energy-saving
performance
(thermal
19
20) Use of
natural
(solar/wind
etc.)
76.7
Energy
reduction effect
43.2
Quality of
service
40.2
90 100
61.5
1) Sound 1
insulation
N=148
52.4
Use of resource
materials
20.3
14.2
24) Reduction
of CO
2 emissions
24CO2
25)
Prevention
of
heat island
(tree-planting/
25
effect
outside air intake/shade)
26) Rainwater
infiltration
26
27) Sorting/Reduction
of
garbage
27
64.2
56.8
Off-site
environment
36.8
64.2
Fig. 1-2 Importance of green items for tenants of office buildings for rent
(Importance DI)
(Source) Opinion survey among companies on green buildings, STB Research Institute
(Note) Importance DI = (the ratio of companies answering Important X 1 + the ratio of companies answering Somewhat important X
0.5) - (the ratio of companies answering Not so important X 0.5 + the ratio of companies answering Not important X 1)
55
(2009 Edition)
Additional
rent amount willing to pay for environmentally-friendly buildings
(When the reduced
amount of the running cost is 5% of the rent)
(5)
N=148
60%
48%
50%
40%
30%
16%
1%
2%
4%
0%
9%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
Not pay
0%
0%
No
answer
2%
10%
4%
Over 10%
6%
8%
4%
7%
10%
14%
6%
20%
Fig. 1-3 Additional rent amount willing to pay for green buildings
(Source) Opinion survey among companies on green buildings, STB Research Institute
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
N=7
N=7
Multiple answers
6
6
7 companies
7
1) Corporate
1
social responsibility
CSR (CSR)
2) Improved
corporate image
2
3) Improved working efficiency of
3
employees
4) Improved intellectual creativity of
4
employees
5) Consideration for stricter regulatory
5
control on environment
6)
Others
6
Fig. 1-4 Reasons for paying additional rent worth over reduced amount (5%) of running cost
(Source) Opinion survey among companies on green buildings, STB Research Institute
56
References
8 Result of survey among property investors (June 2009), Japan Real Estate Institute
9 General description of the result of the Opinion survey among companies on environmentally-friendly buildings (July
2009), Sumitomo Trust & Banking
57
(2009 Edition)
1.2.
1.2.1.
In considering the impact of environmental performances on the property appraisal, the breakdown of property
by area shows the ratio of offices for rent is relatively small. The CO2 emission by the business sector shows the
biggest increase among all the sectors when compared against the base year of the Kyoto Protocol. In order to
achieve the national goal of greenhouse gas reduction, the demand for energy-saving office buildings is
expected to increase further.
This section describes the general description of the rental office market, followed by the current status of
understanding and evaluating green property in the rental office market.
CB Richard Ellis, established in 1969, deals mainly in brokering of offices in Japan. It has one of the nations
biggest databases of office buildings for rent, covering 130,000 buildings and over 630,000 rooms across
Japan. CB Richard Ellis Research Institute publishes the Office Market Report every quarter, which covers
major office building districts in nine regions, 58 cities and 183 zones across Japan.
i. General description of the rental office market
As of the end of 2008, of the total rental room area of office buildings for rent in Japan (total areas for rent of
rental office buildings) as understood by CB Richard Ellis, the 23 Tokyo wards account for about 60%, Osaka
City about 16%, Nagoya City about 6% and the other major ordinance-designated cities account for the rest on
a proportion almost commensurate with their economic sizes.
Take the 23 Tokyo wards, which have the biggest clusters of office buildings for rent in the nation, for example. A
statistical report in Tokyo (Tokyo Land 2007) shows that the office area (including non-rental buildings) in the 23
Tokyo wards including that of banks as of January 1, 2007 is about 87.45 million m2. If, for example, the
availability of 70% is multiplied, the effective area will be about 61.21 million m2. As the total rental room area of
office buildings for rent in the 23 Tokyo wards as of the end of 2006 as understood by CB Richard Ellis is about
32.06 million m2, the statistics covers about 50% of the total though it should be noted the availability is a rough
estimate.
The rental office buildings in stock were broken down into the gross floor area and the number of years after
being built. For the breakdown by the gross floor area, small buildings of less than 1652m2 account for 69% in
terms of the number of buildings. In terms of the gross floor area, however, mid- and large-size buildings of over
9,915m2 account for almost half at 54%. For the breakdown by the number of years after being built, old
buildings of over 25 years account for 40% in terms of the number of buildings and 35% in terms of the gross
floor area while new buildings of less than five years account for 3% in terms of the number of buildings and
13% in terms of the gross floor area.
0%
10%
20%
30%
23
23 Tokyo wards
(By gross floor(
area, number1
of buildings)
40%
50%
60%
70%
69%
23 Tokyo wards
23
(By gross floor
area,
(
aggregate total
of gross floor2
area)
15%
11%
Less
than
500
2
1652m
0%
23
23 Tokyo wards
(By number of(
years built, 1
number of buildings)
23
23 Tokyo wards
(By number of(
years built, 2
aggregate total
of gross floor
area)
10%
20%
100%
11%
5%
54%
1653
3305m2
5001000
40%
3306
9915m2
10003000
50%
40%
60%
70%
Over
9916m2
3000
80%
32%
1525
years
1525
100%
3%
20%
5 15 years
515
90%
10%
47%
35%
Over
25 years
25
90%
15%
20%
30%
80%
13%
55
years or less
Fig. 1-5 Composition of rental office buildings in stock in the 23 Tokyo wards
58
The room vacancy rate (= vacant room area / total area of rooms for rent) in the office market for the 23 Tokyo
wards has turned upward since late 2007 due to a radical change in economic conditions. In the immediate 1st
quarter of 2009, the rate stands at 3.8%. The demand by corporate tenants is affected heavily by economic
conditions of the time and, generally, the rent for each building is determined through negotiations with tenants
based on the buildings comparative evaluation with its competing buildings of such characteristics as the
location, size and functions, etc. The tenant rent, which is the source of income to be produced by the office
building for rent, is determined through comparison under the market conditions of the time. If corporate tenants
can understand the various benefits (Example: reduction in energy cost payment as a result of energy-saving
effects, publicity of corporate attitudes in terms of CSR, etc.) of the energy-saving performance of the buildings
while negotiating the rent, the environmental performances of the tenant buildings may be clearly recognized as
a factor in determining the rent.
8 .0 %
23 Tokyo
2
wards3
Major 5
5
wards
Surrounding
1
8
18 wards
7 .0 %
6 .0 %
5 .0 %
3.9%
4 .0 %
3.8%
3 .0 %
3.4%
2 .0 %
1 .0 %
'00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
0 .0 %
The value called rent in the rental office market includes various concepts including new rent to be paid by
new tenants, continuous rent to be paid by existing tenants, offered rent to be proposed by lessors in
negotiations with tenants, negotiated rent to be presented during the negotiation process and (new) agreed
rent to be presented at the final stages of negotiations, etc. And the levels of values also differ. Thus, special
attention is required to the definition of the word rent. As the rent varies according to various factors including
locations, sizes, functions and market environment, etc., it is also necessary to make comparison by taking
such pre-conditions fully into consideration when evaluating values of a property by considering factors for
difference in rent.
ii. Opinion survey among tenants
CB Richard Ellis Research Institute conducted an opinion survey on offices among corporate tenants in the
summer of 2008 (Tokyo: valid answers 403, Osaka: 279, Nagoya: 124). On the question of Complaints about
the current buildings, many respondents cited complaints about facilities and equipment and, specifically,
they complained about elevators and segmentation of air-conditioning controls. On the question of Items they
wish to be improved even at additional cost, the largest number of respondents cited earthquake resistance
as the most wanted item probably for their emphasis on the safety of their employees and the BCP. On the
question of motivations for future office relocation and new offices, many respondents cited such reasons as
expansion of floor space as a result of increased staff and reorganizing offices to reduce costs.
In view of increased awareness about the environment, the question Wishing to move into buildings with less
environmental loads has been added to the survey since 2008, but very few people responded positively to this
question. At around the time of the survey, it probably was difficult to quantify the benefits (such as the cost) and
the environmental performances were rarely perceived to be a direct motive to relocate offices.
59
(2009 Edition)
specifications through brochures. However, such brochures only describe the method and control zones of
air-conditioning for the air-conditioning specification, desk-top lighting for the lighting specification and power
consumption per m2 for the power specification. Thus, corporate tenants currently do not (or cannot) obtain
such information as unit power consumption, hourly energy consumption and energy efficiency, etc. when
selecting buildings for relocation.
Under such circumstances, it is difficult for tenants to select buildings through comparison of energy
performance against the standard, as there is no explicit description of CASBEE or other assessment results. It
is, therefore, necessary to improve such situations in order for the environmental performances to be perceived
as the basic performance of office buildings for rent.
iv. Compatibility between items for selecting tenant buildings and items for CASBEE assessment (existing
building)
The table below shows the association between assessment items for office buildings for rent and CASBEE
(existing building) assessment items.
Assessment items for office buildings for rent and CASBEE (existing building) assessment items generally
correspond to each other. However, in selecting office buildings, tenants generally tend to place importance on
such basic items as proximity to nearby train stations, standard floor area, open hours of the building gates,
earthquake resistance, etc. As the target, scope and purpose of assessment are different between CASBEE
assessment and tenant building assessment, it is only natural that the assessment standard for each item and
the depth and weights, etc. are different. And it will be necessary to take into consideration the relationship with
the priority (weights) in the selection standard of offices while associating with CASBEE assessment.
Table 1-1 Compatibility between tenant building assessment items and CASBEE assessment items
Charact
eristics
Variable
Invariable
Location
Transportation
Roads
Proximity to nearby
train stations
Cluster of businesses
Facilities of
convenience
Surrounding
environment
Standard floor area
Standard floor shape
Pillars and their
locations
Floor load
Ceiling height
Design, appearance,
size
Entrance
Years since built
Quake resistance
Building name
Elevator
Parking lot
Scalability
Entrance
Air-conditioning
Electric outlet
capacity
OA cables
Lighting
Corresponding
CASBEE
items
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
60
Security
Interior (floor, wall,
ceiling)
Toilets
Kettle room
Common space
Barrier-free
61
(2009 Edition)
Table 1-2
Relations between CASBEE (existing building) environmental items and office building
assessment items
Corresponding
items for
building
assessment by
tenants
1
Background noise level
2
Equivalent noise level
1.2 Sound Insulation
Sound Insulation of Openings
1
Sound Insulation of Partition Walls
2
Sound Insulation Performance of Floor
3
Slabs (light-weight impact source)
Sound Insulation Performance of Floor
4
Slabs (heavy-weight impact source)
1.3 Sound Absorption
2 Thermal Comfort
2.1 Room Temperature Control
1
Room Temperature
Variable Loads and Following-up Control
2
3
Perimeter Performance
4
Zoned Control
Temperature and Humidity Control
5
6
Individual Control
Non-regular Hour Air-conditioning
7
8
Monitoring Systems
2.2 Humidity Control
2.3 Type of Air Conditioning System
Difference in high and low temperature
1
2
Average airflow speed
3 Lighting & Illumination
3.1 Daylighting
1
Daylight Factor
2
Openings by Orientation
3
Daylight Devices
3.2 Anti-glare Measures
Glare from Light Fixtures
1
2
Daylight Control
3.3 Illuminance Level
1
Illuminance
2
Uniformity of Illuminance
3.4 Lighting Controllability
4 Air Quality
4.1 Source Control
1
Chemical Pollutants
2
Asbestos
3
Mites, Mold etc
4
Legionella
4.2 Ventilation
1
Ventilation Rate
Natural Ventilation Performance
2
Consideration for Outside Air Intake
3
4
Air Supply Planning
4.3 Operation Plan
CO2 Monitoring
1
2
Control of Smoking
(10)
Concerned categories
Corresponding
items for
building
assessment by
tenants
1
Provision of Space & St
2
Use of Advanced Inform
3
Barrier-free Planning
1.2 Amenity
1
Perceived Spaciousnes
2
Space for Refreshment
3
Dcor Planning
1.3 Maintenance Management
1
Comprehensive effort
2
Cleaning
3
Sanitation control
2 Durability & Reliability
2.1 Earthquake Resistance
1
Earthquake-resistance
Seismic Isolation & Vibration Damping
2
Systems
2.2 Service Life of Components
Service Life of Structural Frame
1
Materials
Necessary Refurbishment Interval for
2
Exterior Finishes
Necessary Renewal Interval for Main
3
Interior Finishes
Necessary Replacement Interval for
4
Air Conditioning and Ventilation Ducts
Necessary Renewal Interval for HVAC
5
and Water Supply and Drainage Pipes
Necessary Renewal Interval for Major
6
Equipment and Services
2.3 Appropriate renewal
Updating finishing materials for
1
roofs/external walls
Updating pipes/wiring materials
2
Updating major facilities/equipment
3
2.4 Reliability
1
HVAC System
2
Water Supply & Drainage
3
Electrical Equipment
Support Method of Machines & Ducts
4
Communications & IT Equipment
5
3 Flexibility & Adaptability
3.1 Spatial Margin
Allowance for Floor-to-floor Height
1
Adaptability of Floor Layout
2
3.2 Floor Load Margin
3.3 Adaptability of Facilities
Ease of Air Conditioning Duct Renewal
1
Ease of Water Supply and Drain Pipe
2
Renewal
Ease of Electrical Wiring Renewal
3
Ease of Communications Cable Renewal
4
Ease of Equipment Renewal
5
6
Securing backup space
Q3
1
2
3
(2)
(11),(12)
(16)
(3),(5)
(15)
(14)
(7),(15)
(9)
(7),(14)
(5)
(3)
(4)
(9)
3.1
3.2
(1),(6),(15)
(Source: CB Richard Ellis Research Institute based on CASBEE for Existing Building 2008 Edition Appraisal Manual
(Issued by Institute for Building Environment and Energy Conservation))
62
1.2.2.
Companies in the United States and Europe are increasingly seeking green office buildings for their self-owned
office buildings or office buildings for rent for CSR purposes. While building green office buildings requires
additional costs, awareness is increasing about the economic benefits of improved property values that can be
realized by, for example, increasing tenant satisfaction through improved indoor environments or reduced
maintenance and management fees and responsiveness to environmental risks such as future enhancement of
regulations, etc.
Demand for green office buildings is increasing also in Japan amid increasing social awareness about the
environment. There are generally three conditions for good office buildings from the viewpoint of corporate
tenants and investors Proximity (good location), Big (big in size) and New (soon after being built). It is
highly probable that the environmental consideration (high environmental performances) will be added to them
in the future.
The rent for 21 tenant buildings that underwent CASBEE assessment were surveyed in order to understand the
impact of environmental performances on the current rent of tenant buildings and the relationship between
CASBEE scores and the rent was analyzed. The survey was conducted in Nagoya City where reporting
CASBEE results for buildings of over a certain size was made obligatory for the first time in the country and
targeted tenant buildings whose information about rent are available and that publicly released CASBEE
assessment results.
Fig. 1-7 shows the relationship between BEE values of CASBEE and rent. However, as mentioned earlier, as
the rent is heavily affected by the location, size and the number of years after being built, it was necessary to
remove such impacts. The office buildings surveyed are relatively similar in the location condition (located in the
office building district in Nagoya City) and are relatively new at 1-3 years old. For these reasons, only the gross
floor areas were adjusted. The gross floor area was classified into four criteria depending on the size super
large, large, middle and small. The values are based on the comparison with the average rent of each
size. Fig. 1-7 indicates that the rent tends to increase as the BEE value goes up. While the coefficient of
determination R2 is low at about 0.48, the significant relationship was found at 0.01 level.
rent by size
2.5
2
y = 0.3766x + 0.65
R = 0.477
p<0.01
1.5
1
0.5
B-
B+
0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
BEE
Fig. 1-7 Relationship between BEE values and rent
The multiple regression analysis was performed by using the CASBEE major items as explanatory variables
and the rent as a dependent variable in order to find CASBEE assessment items that significantly contribute to
rent increases. Fig. 1-8 shows the results. The analysis could not find significant results in three items Q3:
Outdoor environment on site, LR1: Energy and LR2: Resources & Materials while significant impacts on the
rent were observed in three items Q1: Indoor environment, Q2: Quality of service and LR3: Off-site
environment. Standard partial regression coefficient in the longitudinal axis of the graph represents the impact
of each explanatory variable on the rent, and the impact level increases as the absolute value nears 1.
c 2009 Japan Sustainable Building Consortium (JSBC)
Copyright
63
(2009 Edition)
Therefore, better assessment results in Q1: Indoor environment and Q2: Quality of service could lead to
higher rent while a better result in LR3: Off-site environment could lead to lower rent. These findings show that
consideration for Q (environmental quality), which helps increase comfortableness and intellectual productivity
of corporate tenants, is perceived as an added value to office buildings and is reflected in the increased rent
while consideration for LR(environmental load reduction) is yet to be perceived as such.
R2 = 0.53
LR
Environmental
LR
load
Q1
Indoor
environment
Q2
Quality
of service
Q3
Outdoor
environment onsite *
LR1
Energy
*
LR2
Resources
& Materials*
LR3
Off-site
environment
p=0.055
p=0.067
p=0.086
Q
Environmental
Q
quality
p < 0.01
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
-0.80
-1.00
<Regression formula>
Q1
Q2
LR3
CASBEE
major items
CASBEE
However, the results of performing the multiple regression analysis by using the CASBEE middle items as
explanatory variables suggest the possibility that consideration for LR3.6: Off-site environment in LR3:
Off-site environment could lead to increased rent. Consideration for LR (environmental load reduction) could
also be perceived as an added value of office buildings in the future as awareness about the environment and
environmental risks such as future enhancement of regulations increases.
However, the above-mentioned analysis collected little information on rent (number of samples: 21) and,
therefore, the results only show the general trend. Also for the rent values, as offered rent values (to be
proposed by owners) publicly available in the market for offering to corporate tenants were used for the
analysis, they may be significantly different from agreed rent values. The relationship found between the BEE
value and the offered rent may derive from the tendency of owners to make additional investment to increase
the environmental performances of office buildings that are likely to achieve increased rent. Analysis by using
agreed rent may also be necessary to accurately understand how environmental performances are perceived
as additional values of office buildings.
1.2.3.
To understand the relationship in office buildings for rent among Q assessment (environmental quality of
buildings) of CASBEE, facility specifications and rent, office buildings that underwent CASBEE assessment and
buildings with significantly similar rent pricing factors (location, size, etc.) were selected in Tokyo. After
assessing the latter buildings (those with significantly similar rent pricing factors) by the Q items of CASBEE
assessment, they were compared with office buildings that underwent CASBEE assessment in terms of the
facility levels, Q scores and rent levels.
The following considerations were given in making the comparison:
<Criteria to select buildings for comparison>
Considerations were given for differences in the rent accruing from differences in locations and sizes in
selecting buildings for comparison. And office buildings for rent with similar size (standard floor area, gross floor
area, etc.) in neighboring areas were selected. However, as some differences in rent were found even among
samples selected based on such consideration, The impact of location, number of years after being built and
size on differences in rent between buildings that underwent CASBEE assessment and buildings selected for
64
65
(2009 Edition)
Writers
Preface: Assessing environmental
considerations for property based on CASBEE
CASBEE Property Appraisal Manual
1. Domestic trend on property appraisal
1.1. Proliferation of CASBEE and diversified
use
1.2. Move toward considering environmental
added values in the Japanese property
appraisal industry
2. Concept of manual
3. Relations with real estate appraisal, etc.
Hiroaki Takai
Hiroaki Takai, Masato Ito
Reference
1.1. Results of opinion surveys on the
environment among investors and tenants
1.2. Impact of environmental performance on
property rent
1.2.1 Japanese market trend
1.2.2 Analyzing relations between CASBEE
and rent
1.2.3 Case study (Comparing specifications
in same district)
Koichi Matsunaga
Kumi Okumura, Toshiharu Ikaga Laboratory,
Keio University
Koichi Matsunaga
Acknowledgement
This manual is part of the outcomes of the activities of the The Research Committee for CASBEE under Japan
Sustainable Building Consortium (Shuzo Murakami, Chairman) and Working Group for CASBEE and Property
Appraisal. We extend our sincere gratitude to all the people concerned for their cooperation.
< Working Group for CASBEE and Property Appraisal >
Chairman: Shuzo Murakami (Building Research Institute)
Chief: Hiroaki Takai (Takenaka Corporation), Masato Ito (Sumitomo Trust & Banking Co., Ltd.)
Members: Toshiharu Ikaga (Keio University), Kazuo Iwamura (Tokyo City University), Teruaki Uchida (Japan
Real Estate Institute), Hiroyuki Deguchi (Shimizu Corporation), Naoki Nakamura (Engineering & Risk Services
Corporation), Shin Hayakawa (Nihon University), Hiroki Hiramatsu (CSR Design & Landscape), Koichi
Matsunaga(CB Richard Ellis Research Institute)
Observers: Kumi Okumura, Nao Mizoguchi (Toshiharu Ikaga Laboratory, Keio University)
Secretariat: Junko Endo (NIKKEN SEKKEI Research Institute), Kiyohisa Oine, Nobufusa Yoshizawa (Japan
Sustainable Building Consortium)
< Those who cooperated >
Shigeru Urashima, Tokyo Office, Intel Corporation
Seiichi Hayashida, etc., Davis Langdon & Seah Japan Limited
Yoshihiro Kawazoe, Kenji Moriyama, Japan Real Estate Institute
66
Edited by
FAX +81-3-3222-6696
E-mail [email protected]
Published by
Printed by