Better Building: The Responsible Developer's Blog : Northwest Construction Lawyers & Attorneys : Foster Pepper Law Firm : Sustainable Building & LEED Projects in Seattle & Spokane, WA

Does the Responsible Municipal Developer and its citizens aspire to be the "Greenest?" 

Absolutely and the competition is fierce, as it should be, after all it's a matter of civic pride!

Our blog has showcased the many laudable efforts of local and state governments, citizens and private developers to implement green and sustainable development practices (the preservation of open spaces; control and capture of storm and rain water; energy savings; green electric highways; reclamation of brown fields and the construction of passive homes).

So how does our Emerald City compare to other great cities?  Well that depends on the source. 

We looked for objectivity and think we found it in Siemens Global's US and Canada Green City Index  (which was also cited by Time.com).  Siemens' rating was based on some fairly broad comprehensive objectives and methodology.

The objective criteria was to measure and compare the performance of 27 major US and Canadian cities, based on their commitment to reduce their future environmental impacts.  The goal of the index was to allow a comparison of cities against their peers and to study innovative projects which other cities may want to follow.

The methodology was based on the work of other Green City index sites (global) and included 31 quantitative and qualitative indicators in nine categories: CO2; energy; land use; buildings; transport; water; waste; air and environmental governance.

Based on the criteria and the fact the study included Canada, we should be proud that Seattle was #4 with a score of 79.10.  Our score was heavily based on the fact Seattle had set, and met, many environmental goals over the last 10 years and Seattle ranked #1 in the buildings category because it was among the first cities to mandate LEED-certification for municipal building projects.

The City of Seattle has done a fantastic job of setting goals and obtaining the necessary commitments from its citizens to create green and sustainable projects and communities.  Seattle's ranking was no accident but was a result of a great vision and a lot of hard work and expense.

Seattle is a great place to live and work and we can all be proud of this ranking.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Should Responsible (American) Developers build more "Passive" homes?

German developers answer, Jawohl, bauen der Passiv Haus!   

On June 9th the Passivhaus Institut issued a press release recapping the 15th International Passive House Conference that was held in Innsbruck, Austria.  Highlights included 1200 attendees from 50 countries and 100 exhibitors presenting Passive House components.

A "Passive House" (see above) is essentially a super insulated virtually air-tight building that is primarily heated by passive solar gain and by internal gains from people, electrical equipment, etc.  Energy losses are minimized and any remaining heat demand is provided by an extremely small source.  The intended result is an impressive system that saves up to 90% of space heating costs.  Think of it as a 1,650-square-foot version of that super-insulated bottle that keeps your coffee hot or your iced tea cold, except in reverse.  Its ultra-tight shell keeps extreme temperatures out, most of the time with little to no mechanical intervention.  And its main power sources are things nature provides for free: sunlight, shade, earth, and breezes.

As with other technology, Germany and other European nations are far ahead of the US.  According to Builder more than 20,000 single and multifamily homes have been built in Europe but only a dozen have been built in the US.  Builder [online] (and other sources) stated that the additional cost for a Passive House was only 10-20 percent more that a standard home.  Hmm, spend 10-20 percent more and save up to 90 percent of future space heating costs?  Do the math in your area and given how long the home should perform, decide if it is worth it for you.

If you want to see one of the few Passive home projects in the US you do not need to go far.  There is a completed project called Courtland Place in Seattle's Rainier Valley and a nine unit  project in development called Urban Olympic multifamily Passive House. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Kelly Angell, an associate in Foster Pepper’s Real Estate practice group, has earned the LEED Green Associate credential from the Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI). The LEED Green Associate credential is for professionals who support green building design, construction, and operations, and have demonstrated knowledge of green building principles and practices and LEED.

GBCI provides independent oversight of professional credentialing and project certification programs related to green building. GBCI is committed to ensuring precision in the design, development, and implementation of measurement processes for green building performance (through project certification) and green building practice (through professional credentials and certificates).

Established in 2008 to administer certifications and professional designations within the framework of the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED® Green Building Rating Systems™, GBCI continues to develop new programs and offer the marketplace validation that building certifications and professional designations have met specific, rigorous criteria.

At Foster Pepper Kelly's practice is concentrated in real estate law with experience representing clients in acquisitions, dispositions, development, leasing, and financing of commercial, mixed use, retail, and multifamily projects. She is a regular contributor to Foster Pepper’s Better Building: The Responsible Developer’s blog at http://www.responsibledeveloper.com.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 Efforts to reclaim formerly contaminated and publicly inaccessible sites for new sustainable developments are popping up along the shores of the Puget Sound, from Tacoma and Bremerton in the south to Bellingham and Port Townsend in the north. These new projects aim to achieve LEED gold and LEED platinum, with visions to restore marine habitat and provide public access and economic vitality to the urban waterfronts.

A recent article in the Daily Journal of Commerce described the projects occurring along the Puget Sound Shores:

Tacoma

The city of Tacoma successfully reclaimed Fort Wells, a former Superfund site. The waterfront development underwent an extensive cleaning and remediation effort. The area now supports water-dependent and water-oriented uses including maritime business, education and recreation facilities, residential buildings, museums, and retail and commercial buildings. The increased use of the area both ensures that members of the public can enjoy the waterfront, and helps offset the high costs of cleanup and restoration.

The Center for Urban Waters is on target to become Tacoma’s first LEED platinum building. The 50,000 square foot, $23 million environmental lab and research facility opened last spring and is the first new project on the east side of the Foss Waterway.

The building acts as a hub for research on urban waterfronts, houses offices and labs for the city’s Environmental Services science and engineering group, and houses both the University of Washington’s Environmental Studies group and the Puget Sound Partnership. The Puget Sound Partnership is the state-sponsored group charged with developing a long term plan to clean up the Puget Sound.

The building has numerous sustainable features and a goal of achieving “net zero” energy use. The building minimizes runoff and filters water with rain gardens, a green roof and ground level cisterns. These on-site water treatment systems provide up to 50 percent of the building’s water for toilets, and 100 percent of the building’s water for irrigation. The porous pavement on the public walkway allows water to filter into the earth. Several intact dead trees were placed to attract migratory birds to the area. There were also trees placed in the water to provide habitat for marine mammals and fish.

Port Townsend

The Northwest Maritime Center recently made its debut in Port Townsend. The building, which was 15 years in the making, serves as the new home for the Wooden Boat Foundation and as the center for maritime education and the craft of wooden boats. The two-building, 27,000 square foot, $12 million project is the first LEED gold building on the Olympic Peninsula.

The site had a long history of industrial use. It was originally the home of a sawmill, and was later used as an oil terminal and tank farm for decades. Cleanup of the site included removal of over 2,400 tons of contaminated soil.

Over 60 percent of the site is open to the building, in an effort to provide the public with the opportunity to enjoy the shoreline. The new dock also provides moorage for large visiting vessels. The unique heating system uses the temperature differential between nearby seawater and ambient air instead of a traditional gas heat pump. Water source heat exchanger plates were installed under the new pier to use the temperature of the Puget Sound to efficiently heat and cool the two buildings.

The buildings include sustainably harvested woods throughout the structure. The new dock includes stainless-steel panels that reflect sunlight back into the water, which helps migrating and juvenile fish. Over 3,000 square feet of eelgrass was planted to provide nursery grounds and protection for fish, shellfish and marine mammals.

Point Wells 

Just north of Richmond Beach, the 61-acre, $1 billion Point Wells project is the most ambitious waterfront development in the making. Once completed, the project could add up to 4,500 new residents over a 20-year period. This would more than double the population of Richmond Beach.

The project site, which is currently inaccessible to the public, served as an oil tank farm for decades. The site, however, has great potential with a shoreline that stretches three quarters of a mile. Environmental cleanup and shoreline and habitat restoration is estimated to cost $20 to $30 million.

Construction of the project, which could begin as early as 2016, is expected to occur over a 15 to 20 year period. It may add up to 3 million square feet of mixed use buildings. The developer has planned several amenities for residents and guests, including a community center, a boardwalk and bike trail, a public transportation hub (including a Sounder station), a large beach plaza, amphitheater, p-patch opportunities and abundant open space and wetlands.

The sustainable features will include on-site sewage treatment and construction of a biomass plant fueled by agricultural waste brought in via train. The wastewater management system will also include a water system to collect rainwater to use for toilets and irrigations. The site aims for a 96 percent carbon emission reduction, from 1,100 tons per year to 25 tons per year.

These three projects are examples of the transformation of the Puget Sound shoreline that will continue for years into the future to help reclaim urban shorelines and provide a healthy, sustainable urban environment.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In the Better Building Initiative, President Obama proposes new measures to improve energy efficiency in commercial buildings around the United States. The initiative aims to make commercial buildings 20 percent more energy efficient over the next decade by encouraging private sector investment with incentives to upgrade offices, stores, schools, municipal buildings, universities, hospitals, and other commercial buildings.

The goal is to increase cost effective upgrades that will reduce energy bills and save business owners money. The hope is that this cost savings will be used to hire more workers, invent new products, and create shareholder value.

The initiative calls for a reform of existing tax and other incentives for commercial building retrofits, and proposes a new competitive grant program. President Obama is also asking corporate leaders to commit to making progress towards these energy goals. The President’s budget proposal will include efforts to make American businesses more energy efficient through several new initiatives:

• President Obama is asking Congress to redesign the current tax deduction for commercial building upgrades to make the current deduction a tax credit that is more generous and will encourage building owners and real estate investment trusts to retrofit their properties.
   
• President Obama is also making an effort to address the financing access problems for building retrofits. The Small Business Administration is working to encourage lenders to take advantage of increased loan size limits to promote new energy efficiency retrofit loans for small businesses. Further, the President’s budget will also propose a new Department of Energy program that will guarantee loans for energy efficiency upgrades at hospitals, schools and other commercial buildings.
   
• The President’s budget will also propose new competitive grants to states and local governments that streamline commercial energy efficiency standards to encourage upgrades.
   
• President Obama is challenging CEOs and University Presidents to have their organizations set an example in saving energy. Committing to a series of actions to make their facilities more efficient will make the organizations eligible for many benefits including public recognition, technical assistance, and best practices sharing with their peers.
   
• The Obama Administration is also working to implement reforms that will improve transparency around energy efficiency performance and provide more training in energy auditing and building operations.

The end goal of the Better Building Initiative is to increase energy efficiency in commercial buildings by 20 percent and create a potential cost savings of $40 billion per year.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On February 7, 2011, Judge Bryan dismissed the Building Industry Association of Washington’s (“BIAW”) claims that certain newly enacted provisions of the Washington State Energy Code are preempted by federal law. The Washington State Building Code Council (the “Council”) promulgated the revisions, contained in WAC 51-11-0900 (“Chapter 9”), in order to comply with its statutory requirement to achieve a 15 percent reduction in annual net energy consumption in new construction, and originally set the effective date as July 1, 2010.   As we previously reported, BIAW filed suit in federal court in the western district of Washington on May 25, 2010, seeking an injunction and a declaratory judgment that Chapter 9 violated the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (“EPCA”).

The main basis of BIAW’s claims was that Chapter 9 was preempted by EPCA, and therefore invalid. EPCA, as amended, set federal energy efficiency standards for certain "covered products, including heating, ventilating, and air conditioning equipment (“HVAC”) and water heaters, as part of its energy conservation program.  (EPCA is responsible for the familiar bright yellow energy conservation guides you see on new major appliances for sale in retail stores.)

As reported in one of our prior blogs, in a June 8, 2010 letter to the Council, Governor Chris Gregoire asked the Council to delay implementation of the revisions until April 1, 2011, for fear of further delaying the construction industry’s recovery from the recession. The Council did in fact delay the effective date to January 1, 2011.

BIAW had joined with various industry groups to bring their claims, and the NW Energy Coalition, Sierra Club, and others were allowed to intervene for the Council. Both sides brought summary judgment motions. EPCA expressly states that it preempts any state regulations concerning the energy efficiency of “covered products”, but did provide for exceptions, if a state code complied with seven specific requirements. The Council argued Chapter 9 fell within the exceptions, BIAW argued it did not.

In his 23 page opinion, Judge Bryan carefully analyzed each of the contested exceptions and, referring to a combination of legislative history, expert testimony, and computer simulations, found that Chapter 9 passed muster. Judge Bryan granted the Council’s summary judgment motion, denied BIAW’s motion, and dismissed the complaint.

As Washington and other state and local governments amend their energy codes to improve energy efficiency, there will likely be more challenges similar to BIAW’s.  Judge Bryan distinguished one challenge already decided in New Mexico, where a federal court granted an injunction against the City of Albuquerque’s high performance building ordinance because it was preempted by EPCA.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

If you live or work in Seattle, you probably know that after more than forty years of debate, construction is now underway to fix the notorious Mercer Mess. What may surprise you, though, is that the Mercer Corridor improvement project is considered to be a model of responsible development.

If you are unfamiliar with the Mercer Mess, it is a circuitous one-way route running east/west through the South Lake Union neighborhood, connecting Interstate 5 to Elliott Avenue West, and it carries over 80,000 people per day. Built in the 1950s as a temporary route, the corridor divides neighborhoods, hinders development and creates traffic congestion that not only clogs city streets but impacts the entire regional highway system. Fixing the Mercer Mess has been one of the City’s most significant transportation challenges for decades; but after breaking ground in September 2010, Phase I of construction to widen and improve the corridor is well underway.

Major transportation projects present a unique opportunity for cities to implement environmentally-friendly solutions on a large scale, and Seattle has risen to the challenge. In a recent Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce article, “Mercer Street: From a Mess to a Model of Sustainability,” Roger Mason and Angela Brady report that in addition to reducing congestion and increasing mobility, the Mercer Corridor project incorporates many notable sustainable elements such as:

• A reduction in impervious area by 0.5 acres;
• Natural drainage provided by a “wet median” and rain gardens;
• Undergrounding utility lines;
• The deconstruction, salvage and eventual re-use of a historic building;
• A tree canopy along the corridor, including more than 260 trees, 10,000 shrubs and other landscaping;
• Enhanced safety and accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists; and
• Public art installations.

Want to learn more? The Seattle Department of Transportation’s website has information on the planning process, project funding, construction updates and an overview of the entire project here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Does the Responsible Developer spend money in recession to realize the many benefits of green buildings?  One very familiar developer says Yes!

President Obama may now be a Responsible Developer because earlier this month he agreed that in order to obtain the cost savings of green buildings, you had to spend money to properly maintain them.  This news was well received by the IAPMO (the code and trade association that develops plumbing, mechanical and solar codes).  Accordingly, Obama signed into law new legislation that provides training to federal building managers to ensure that taxpayers realize the benefits of the intended energy cost savings in green buildings.  Interestingly, the bill did not provide extra funding.

The 2010 Federal Buildings Personnel Training Act will give the General Services Administration a year and half to identify the core skills needed to manage these ever increasingly sophisticated buildings and to make sure the managers get standardized and certified training.

One of the new bill's sponsors, Representative Russ Carnahan, co-chairman of the congressional high-performance building caucus, stated that "Sustainability and energy conservation isn't just about the air we breathe or the water we drink.  It's about saving money for families, businesses and taxpayers."

Of course this pay-to-save sentiment is not entirely new.  Three years ago, at an annual meeting of public owners in Seattle, an attendee commented that they had been given more than adequate new construction budgets for green, energy efficient buildings, but had been given inadequate budgets for training and maintenance.  He felt that the lack of funding for maintenance would lead to reduced energy savings, costly repairs or claims.   

The Responsible Developer, even in tough economic times, realizes that the only way to achieve the intended cost savings of green and more efficient buildings is to properly manage and maintain them.  She and he also know that the same maintenance is also good risk management because it may prevent indoor air quality and property damage claims.  Other bloggers like Greg Zimmerman (Facilitiesnet) have wisely noted that responsibilities must be clearly spelled out in Green Building Contracts to avoid claims.

So Developers and Owners, you can be Presidentially Green and save money in the long run by providing better training of your managers and giving them the money to maintain your buildings.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Seems as if green building is not only here to stay, it is the one bright light in the otherwise dark or dim construction industry. Nonetheless, there is growing criticism--and response---about perceived deficiencies with the current LEED rating systems.

We have reported robust predictions for green building in previous blogs. Green building now accounts for nearly one third of new construction in the U.S., up from 2 percent in 2005, according to McGraw Hill Construction. Currently, LEED certification comes after construction of the particular structure, with no relationship to that structure's operational performance in terms of energy efficiency or carbon footprint. Green building certification does not ensure lifelong energy efficient performance, something critics believe should be accounted for in a green building rating system.

USGBC responded to this criticism by launching its Building Performance Initiative last summer. After a series of area summit meetings with local, state and federal government representatives, USGBC chapters, developers, architects, engineers, builders, and other construction professionals, USGBC has created the Building Performance Partnership (BPP). BPP is collecting water and energy use data from LEED certifed buildings, which are required to be reported under LEED's 2009 rating systems. Recently, current LEED certified building owners were invited to participate in BPP.

USGBC assures its users that reports will not be used to decertify existing certifications. In a recent press release, USGBC states BPP "will result in the population of a comprehensive green building performance database and enable standardization of reporting metrics and analytics to establish new building performance benchmarks." Currently, more than 120 projects are participating in BPP, and USGBC says these projects will receive a basic performance report in time for its Greenbuild 2010 conference in November this year.

Critics don't think this goes far enough, and think the federal government should lead the charge to establish building performance requirements. Phil Bernstein, vice president of Autodesk, Inc., a San Rafel, Calif., engineering and design software company, suggests "The USBGC should make it so that the LEED Platinum plaque pops off the wall if the building fails to perform."

Expect continuing developments and requirements in the green building performance arena, from USGBC and other rating agencies, along with the federal, state and local governments. In the meantime, I am pleased to report that our Seattle office building recently achieved a LEED Silver rating under LEED's existing buildings program... more to report later!
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the relationship between green building and sustainable development.  “Green” and “sustainable” are often used interchangeably when talking about responsible development, but they aren’t always synonymous.  While a “green” building may have achieved a significant reduction in energy consumption, it might not be a good example of “sustainable” development.  Green buildings and the efficiencies they create cannot really be considered sustainable unless they also address the broader impacts of development.  For example, an otherwise green building may actually generate a high carbon footprint if its occupants have to make a long daily commute, all alone in their cars, to get there.

Architects Joshua Prince-Ramus, Randolph Croxton and Tuomas Toivonen agree that “green building” alone is not sufficient to achieve a meaningful reduction in our ecological footprint.  In a recent article, they suggest that maximizing the existing infrastructure in our urban cores must form the basis of a sustainable future. As Prince-Ramus puts it, “urban living itself is the embodiment of sustainability.”

In addition to increasing urban density, Prince-Ramus and his co-authors present several other strategies that can be implemented to incentivize growth and development while reducing our overall carbon footprint, including the use of urban growth boundaries, transferrable development rights, community-based metrics of sustainability, and the development of more flexible urban structures that can accommodate a variety of uses.  While these aren’t necessarily new concepts, Prince-Ramus suggests that perhaps they should play a larger role when considering the overall impact of a project’s design – so that in addition to “greening” the technical aspects of design and construction, the development itself can help to positively change human behavior.  In other words, truly sustainable development requires a holistic approach, one that incorporates systemic solutions such as increasing density, limiting sprawl, and changing our automobile-centric ways.

Do you agree with Prince-Ramus and his colleagues?  What long-term strategies do you think will be most effective in reducing our ecological footprint while encouraging responsible development?
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Bastyr University claims to be the first school in the country to be in line to earn a LEED Platinum certification for its just completed student housing project. Consisting of 11 three story buildings housing 132 students, the project marks Bastyr’s first addition to the school’s campus since the natural health arts and sciences school took over its current home at the 51 acre site of a former Catholic monastery in Kenmore, Washington. Bastyr formally celebrated the project opening on June 22, 2010.

Bastyr and its general contractor, Shuchart Corporation, went through many steps to reach Platinum status. Energy efficient construction was used throughout the project, including high r-value insulation, energy efficient and long lasting fiberglass windows with ultra high performance glass, and radiant floor heating with super high efficiency gas boilers. Energy efficient light fixtures, appliances, and plumbing fixtures were used throughout the project and harvested rain water will be used throughout the complex for non-drinking purposes.

During construction, the contractor was able to recycle a remarkable 96 percent of the construction waste, primarily through training of subcontractors, critical layout of recycling containers, and proactive arrangements with local facilities for recycling of materials. Benches and other items were made form scraps and leftovers, and some chairs and benches were made from the webbing of old car seat belts.

Outside, buildings are connected by a series of garden paths, courtyards, and outdoor living spaces carefully designed to be energy efficient and mitigate the impact on the local environment. Ample bike storage promotes students' use of their bikes for transportation and an extensive bioswale and sediment pond system treats recovered surface water before releasing it back slowly into neighboring wetlands.

Bastyr utilized a LEED consultant for the project, Seattle’s O’Brien and Company, and early on in the project applied for and received a grant from the King County LEED Grants Program. This program is part of the county’s “Green Tools” program to encourage sustainable building outside the city of Seattle.

Bastyr University is proud of its sparkling new sustainable building. Its president, Daniel K. Church, said: “Providing students with eco-friendly, on-campus housing is a significant milestone in furthering our mission to enhance the health and well-being of the human community.”

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link