Portland Architecture

National Trust partnering with Green Building Services, Cascadia Green Building Council on renovation study

Ecotrust/Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center, Portland, photo by Brian Libby 

For all the progress that's been made over the last decade (and more) advancing green buildings, most of that has focused on new construction. It's the same on the research front: Lots of studies have done analyzing  the merits of constructing new green buildings, yet there’s relatively little data available on the economic and environmental benefits of building reuse.

That will soon change thanks to a new partnership between the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Portland-based Green Building Services and the Cascadia Region Green Building Council. The three groups are partnering on a large, unprecedented study that will quantify the value of building reuse in a number of different situations, such as environmental impacts avoided when homeowners reuse and retrofit an existing house rather than tear one down and construct a new green home in its place.

“We can’t build our way out of the climate change crisis," said Richard Moe, president of the National Trust, in a press release. "We have to conserve our way out, and this study provides us with a unique and crucial opportunity to help people understand the environmental value of building reuse.”

Buildings consume around 40 percent of total energy use in the United States. "So they are a big part of the problem, and, by necessity, they have to be an integral part of the solution," added Ralph DiNola of Green Building Services."The energy and environmental impacts embodied in the building’s structure become a more significant part of the equation.  With this study, we aim to provide real clarity about these impacts.”

Gerding Theater at the Portland Armory, photo by Brian Libby 

The study, funded with a grant from the Summit Foundation, will employ a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) evaluation to look at the differences between energy, carbon, water and other environmental impacts in new construction and building reuse. The LCA study will examine several building types in four regions of the United States. The research, team members say, requires a comprehensive understanding not only of existing buildings, building materials and methods, but also of the numerous development forces at play in shaping the built environment, many of which cannot be easily quantified. 

Jason F. McLennan of the Cascadia Green Building Council said, “Throughout their lifecycle, building materials are responsible for a whole range of adverse environmental impacts ― from destructive resource depletion and energy-intensive manufacturing, to accumulation of toxins after their disposal.  This important study will provide key missing data for the green building industry as we advocate for lower environmental impacts through building and material reuse.”

Green Building Services, a sustainable development consulting firm, has expanded from its Portland office to include outposts in Sacramento, Orlando and Houston. Cascadia is one of three original chapters of the US Green Building Council and, as a chapter of the Canada Green Building Council as well, is the only international chapter in North America. 

The study is expected to be completed in early 2011.

David Cook and redefining sustainability

Unilever Haus, Hamburg Germany, courtesy Behnish Architecten 

David Cook of Behnisch Architekten, currently the Pietro Belluschi Distinguished Visiting Professor in Architecture at the University of Oregon School of Architecture, will be speaking at the U of O White Stag Building at 6PM Thursday evening, May 20th.

Behnisch Architekten is an international leader in large scale sustainable design projects. The Stuttgart, Germany-based architecture and planning firm maintains US offices in Los Angeles and Boston. Their portfolio includes the LEED Platinum-rated Genzyme Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts; the Norddeutsche Landesbank in Hannover, Germany; the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Cultural District Riverfront Development Plan; a corporate headquarters for Unilever in Hamburg, Germany; and a Science Complex for Harvard University.

 “The name Behnisch is associated with a particular architectural language, one characterized by transparency, lightness and a decidedly modern approach," reads the firm's website. "In more than 50 years over 150 buildings have been realized, many of which are considered milestones in German post-war architecture, ranging from large-scale sports facilities to administration and bank buildings, from educational facilities, museums, libraries and airport towers to residential buildings of all sizes.”

David Cook (pictured at right) studied architecture at the Polytechnic in Manchester and obtained his Diploma at the University of East London in 1992. Together with firm leaders Stefan Behnisch and Martin Haas, he has co-led  Behnisch Architekten since 2006.

Cook will be speaking in conjunction with the exhibit  ”Design, Ecology, Synergy”  which redefines the term sustainability by examining how people inhabit their built environments. This exhibition, which toured Europe, showcases the design approach of Behnisch Architekten and Transsolar Climate  Engineering, as illustrated by several international projects and ongoing collaborations. 

"It is a cleverly designed exhibition that demonstrates the human senses to the built environment," says John Jennings of BetterBricks (a Portland Architecture sponsor). "Human scale diagrams show our intake of the environment and our reactions to light, material, temperature, air, and sound as conditions determined or often dictated by the enclosure system of the building. The exhibition appropriately features audio, visual, and tactile displays including large light boxes where information on each category (light, material, etc.) is printed on the surface; videos of interviews and projects; project models, and large colorful dome luminaries."

The lecture is free and open to the public, and will take place at 6PM at the University of Oregon's White Stag Block, at 70 NW Couch Street.

Architect Magazine lists SERA Architects as nation's #3 green architecture firm, ZGF as #7 firm overall

Edith Green-Wendell Wyatt Federal Building renovation, rendering by Scott Baumberger and Baumberger Studio 

The May issue of Architect Magazine has come out with two lists: its second annual Architect 50, listing the nation's top firms, and a separate list of the top green architecture firms specifically.

Portland firms had a substantial presence on both lists. Most notably, SERA Architects was listed at #3, just behind the giant Chicago firm Perkins + Will and EYP Architecture & Engineering of Albany, New York.

Also on the top 10 green firms list was Portland firm ZGF Architects at #10. And DLR Group, which is based in Omaha but has a Portland office, was listed at #9.

Then there was the Architect 50 list, which had ZGF listed as the #7 firm in the country. "ZGF is as green as its Pacific Northwest roots would suggest," the listing text reads, "while its strength in health care, infrastructure, and government work has kept it chugging through the recession." New York-based Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, which previously operated a Portland office and designed local landmarks like Memorial Coliseum, the US Bancorp Tower ("Big Pink"), Autzen Stadium and the Standard Insurance Center, was listed as the nation's top firm.

The Architect 50 list is a little different from other lists of top national architecture firms in that it "recognizes ecological commitment and design quality as much as profitability when measuring the country’s very best A, AE, and AEC firms."

Meanwhile, yesterday I spoke with SERA Architects' principal Clark Brockman about the listing as America's #3 green architecture firm.

Brockman likes the fact that Architect Magazine didn't just add up the number of LEED-rated projects and LEED-accredited professionals to compile the list; also included was a "firm culture" metric, for which SERA earned a high ranking. "I’d hope we keep finding new measures," Brockman said. "What we really want is to inspire more and more firms to be going green faster and faster. But this is a move in the right direction."

Today SERA has about 85 employees, which is about the same number the firm employed two years ago, when the Great Recession was beginning to take its toll. Just breaking even in terms of employee growth during the worst economic climate since the 1930s is pretty impressive. The obvious conclusion to draw is that SERA's focus on green is what allowed the firm to prosper amidst the tough times. 

But Brockman says it's not that simple. He points to SERA's diverse portfolio of both public and private clients. The firm is also an employee-owned company, which he says helps them retain talent and keep people motivated. "I sure wouldn’t want the message to be that SERA thinks we are where we ware because of green," he says. "I think of being sustainable in a broad sense. We want to be financially sustainable, protecting and saving staff, and working on green design."

Another key for SERA, Brockman argues, has been the development over the past two years of the firm's  in-house Sustainability Resources Group (SURG), comprised of employees with specific areas of sustainable expertise. "We’ve got a mechanical engineer, skin experts, daylighting and lighting experts," he adds. "Two years ago we had two people in that group amongst 85 people on staff and now it’s seven. We’re busy as heck and providing a lot of service to all the projects in the firm.  But it’s constantly changing."

Right now SERA is engaged in three major projects: the Oregon Sustainability Center (in partnership with GBD Architects) and a renovation of the Edith Green-Wendell Wyatt Federal Building (in partnership with Cutler Anderson Architects), both in Portland, as well as an extensive sustainable master-planning process for the city of Liwa in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

The Oregon Sustainability Center, as its website describes, is "a first-of-a-kind synthesis of unparalleled environmental performance with an integrated sustainability agenda, serving both as a technological model and as a hub for sustainable practices, policy, education, research and entrepreneurship." Located on the edge of the Portland State University campus in downtown Portland, the OSC will bring together academic, government, nonprofit and business sectors. It is being designed to achieve triple net-zero performance in energy and water use and carbon emissions, and to meet the world’s most stringent green building criteria, the Cascadia Region Green Building Council’s Living Building Challenge.

Oregon Sustainability Center, rendering courtesy oregonsustainabilitycenter.org

The OSC would be upon completion perhaps America's greenest office tower, and that is a hugely impressive achievement for SERA, GBD and developer Gerding Edlen. The only criticism I would personally make is that, to my eyes at least, from a visual, aesthetic standpoint it seems ugly, like a banal office building with a mismatched top. But this is also not a final design, so there is still time to change that. And if I'm critical of the look of the building based on the renderings released so far, let me be absolutely clear in saying that doing any Living Building office is hugely impressive. It's just that architecture is, at its ideal, a marriage of the practical and scientific with art and beauty.

I also wonder if an even greener move would be to build the Oregon Sustainability Center in an existing building, such as the empty US Customs House, which the GSA is currently seeking a tenant for via online auction, or the nearly empty Gus Solomon United States Courthouse downtown on Broadway, just a few blocks from the OSC site. But this is neither SERA's decision nor GBD's to make. That said, SERA has extensive renovation experience with landmark projects like City Hall in Portland. What better way to combine the firm's talents?

For the Abu Dhabi project, SERA and the other firms involved have engaged in what's called "energy-mapping", which Brockman says has "allowed us to map climate effects at a city scale. We’ve been siting and massing the buildings in a way that creates a comfortable place in a harsh environment. To be creating district scale tools that function in real time and allow us to design in real time based on climate and comfort, that’s a whole new world. Which I also think is a theme. It feels more and more like the projects we’re working on are all research, and they’re feeding other projects. The city-scale tool we're using in Abu Dhabi is going to be invaluable with all the eco-district work that will be happening in Portland."

The $133 million Wyatt building project (pictured at the top of this post) has been high profile, earning a feature in the Washington Post. The ultra-green retrofit will include rooftop solar panels supplying up to 15% of the building’s power needs, a new overhanging roof to provide shade, and a water collection and reuse system combined with low-flow fixtures that will reduce potable water consumption by as much as 68%. The big buzz surrounding this project, though, is a 250-foot vertical green wall that will cover the entire western facade of the office tower. Plants will grow on facade ‘fins’ that act like garden trellises during the spring and summer, shading the building to reduce energy bills. In the colder months, the plants will naturally drop their foliage and sunlight can once again penetrate the building to provide warmth.

Hopefully the green wall will actually happen, though. A May 4 report Daily Journal of Commerce report by Nathalie Weinstein suggests the GSA may wind up scrapping the wall due to budget concerns.

Brockman says lessons learned on the Oregon Sustainability Center and the Wyatt building are influencing each other. "We’re designing a new building a few blocks from an existing building retrofit a few blocks from each other, so we can share lessons back and forth," he says. "We learned something on OSC and took it to the Wyatt a week later. And the façade research on Wyatt will very much inform the way we move on the OSC's envelope design. It’s a huge privilege but exciting too."

Twelve West named to AIA/COTE Top 10 Green Projects List, first for Portland firm or building

Photo by Brian Libby 

For all of Portland's leadership in the field of sustainable design, the city and its architecture firms have been continually on the outside looking in when it comes to the biggest national architecture prize for green buildings, The American Institute of Architects Committee on the Environment's Top 10 Green Projects list.

Each year the program celebrates, in the AIA's words, "projects that are the result of a thoroughly integrated approach to architecture, natural systems and technology," that "make a positive contribution to their communities, improve comfort for building occupants and reduce environmental impacts through strategies such as reuse of existing structures, connection to transit systems, low-impact and regenerative site development, energy and water conservation, use of sustainable or renewable construction materials, and design that improves indoor air quality."

But despite Portland often being called America's greenest city, and at several junctures having the most LEED-rated buildings of any US city, there has never before been a building project in Portland by a Portland firm to crack the Top Ten. Until now, with the listing of Twelve West, designed (and partially occupied) by ZGF Architects.

Portland has come close to making the Top Ten before. The Gerding Theater at the Portland Armory, designed by GBD Architects, won Honorable Mention for the 2007 list. But it still wasn't in the Top 10. The Wayne Morse Courthouse in Eugene was included in 2007's listing, but Eugene isn't Portland and the lead architect, Morphosis and Pritzker Prize winner Tom Mayne, is based in Southern California. The Lloyd Crossing sustainable design plan was included in 2005, but it was designed by a Seattle firm, Mithun, and is only an urban and greenspace plan, not a building. There was also the Bank of Astoria by Manzanita architect Tom Bender that made the list in 2002, but again, that's something different from Portland.

Photo by Brian Libby 

If our city was chasing windmills with the COTE Top Ten in years past, perhaps it took a building with windmills to make the list. That would be Twelve West, the mixed use building designed by ZGF Architects and developed by Gerding Edlen. Besides its other green credentials, including two LEED Platinum certifications, LEED-NC (new construction) overall and LEED-CI for the office interiors at ZGF's headquarters in the building, exceeding current 2030 Challenge benchmarks for energy use, and achieving an overall savings of 46% over a baseline standard, Twelve West also happens to be the first building with wind turbines in an urban setting in the United States.

One thing I've always wondered about the AIA/COTE list is whether they may be any kind of regional or other geographical bias. Was Portland merely being ignored? That seems unlikely, because even Seattle, in the same region, has earned numerous Top 10 listings. Even so, the lack of inclusion for Portland projects always seemed incongruent with what the rest of the green building world was saying about the city.

Yet when I look at the jury for this year's Top Ten, I can't help but wonder if some extra familiarity with Portland and its architects and developers was helpful. After all, this year's jury included Peter Busby, the Vancouver architect with Busby, Perkins & Will. Busby designed the Meriwether Condominiums in South Waterfront in Portland for Gerding Edlen. Did he recuse himself from choosing Twelve West? It doesn't seem so. Then there was Alison G. Kwok from the University of Oregon. She has no connection to Gerding or ZGF that I know of, but her familiarity with local architecture must have helped.

Photo by Brian Libby 

There's no doubting, though, that Twelve West deserves to be on the COTE list. The 23-story, 552,000 square foot building was constructed with low-impact materials, including salvaged, reclaimed and FSC-certified wood. Much of the concrete structure is exposed on the interior, minimizing the use of finish material and providing ample thermal mass. A 47% reduction in potable water use is predicted through use of efficient fixtures, low-water roof plantings, and rainwater reuse. And placing the building atop a surface parking lot in Portland's dense urban core (on the site of a former surface parking lot) facilitates a pedestrian oriented, car-free lifestyle for the occupants, which minimizes required parking while increasing density and reducing stormwater runoff.

In the years ahead, it will be interesting to see how Gerding Edlen and ZGF move forward. Gerding has changed its focus from new construction and mixed-use towers to renovating existing buildings, but if the economy were to start booming again, that would likely change. The developer began its rise to prominence with the Brewery Blocks development with GBD Architects, employing the firm for all five buildings plus the Armory and then an additional project, The Casey, just down the street. Those were all LEED-rated project, not to mention the Armory as the nation's first project on the National Register of Historic Places to earn a LEED rating, and The Casey was the first condo. But ZGF has now designed the first Portland building on the COTE Top 10 list, putting the firm on arguably equal fitting with GBD for top-shelf local green architecture credentials. When you couple that with the work ZGF is doing in Eugene for the University of Oregon's athletic department, such as the Jaqua Center and another to-be-announced project, it gives this venerable Portland firm a firm grip on the future.

Sustainability and using what you have

Photo by Brian Libby 

Mike Francis, a member of The Oregonian's editorial board, had an editorial published Saturday that explores the intersection of sustainability and historic preservation.

Francis tells of meeting recently with David J. Brown and Anthea Hartig, the executive vice president and the western director for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, when the pair were in Portland last week. (Individuals and groups continually seek out the paper's editorial board to make their case for something.) 

Brown's primary message was, as Francis recalls, "that saving and reusing buildings is more environmentally friendly and economically sound than tearing them down, even if they are replaced by the greenest, LEEDiest structures imaginable."

Brown cited a National Trust-commissioned report by Rutgers University that examines the economic effects of the Federal Historic Tax Credit. 

The report concludes that the Federal Historic Tax Credit is a highly efficient job creator, and has accounted for the creation of 1.8 million new jobs over the life of the program. The report also finds that the Federal Historic Tax Credit has generated jobs more efficiently than other stimulus options, and that the economic activity leveraged by credit returns more tax revenue to the U.S. Treasury than the cost of implementing the program.

"The case for preservation improving sustainability is more intuitive," Francis writes. He goes on to say: 

"Of course it's less wasteful to reuse a building than to tear it apart, cart away the rubble, and import and erect new piles of steel, glass and concrete. That was what so maddening (to me, at least) with the arguments of those who wanted to tear down Memorial Coliseum to erect a "green" baseball stadium. As much as I appreciate the presence of baseball, beer and warm summer evenings, it seemed crazy to demolish a perfectly usable building a couple of miles away from the Beavers' current home to relocate the team. The only argument in favor seemed to be that nobody had yet figured out how to put the coliseum to use since the Trail Blazers moved next door, so better to tear the place down than re-use it.

That kind of thinking is what threatens a lot of the places where we work, live and play. Sometimes, we manage to make the best of it, as when civic leaders created Pioneer Courthouse Square on the block that housed a grand Portland hotel until it was demolished for parking. Sometimes, we do a halfway decent thing, such as pouring money into the Pioneer Courthouse next door, although it was an enormously bad idea to, essentially, privatize the place by evicting the post office and carving out an exclusive underground parking lot for the visiting judges there. 

Most often, sadly, we tear down something of cultural, emotional or historical value in order to make way for something else, usually of lesser value. When that happens, we're all the poorer for it."

Of course one of the key landmarks under threat of demolition or radical alteration Francis talks about, Memorial Coliseum, still has its fate hanging in the balance.

Photo by Brian Libby 

It is arguable that all three of the remaining finalists selected by the mayor and PDC's Stakeholder Advisory Committee are at least partially preservation oriented in that they preserve the exterior. But only the Blazers' Jumptown proposal actually retains the inside of the building as an arena without compromising the integrity of its signature bowl-in-a-glass-box design. Oh, and in this Great Recession, retaining the Coliseum as an arena is the cheapest option and the most sustainable. And have you been in this building with the curtain open, like it was meant to be? I've met few Portlanders, even the natives, who actually have.

As it happens, National Public Radio ran a story on Morning Edition a few days ago ("Building Law Seen As Threat To California History") about the intersection of sustainability and preservation. The story profiled Paul Song, who, after demolishing his home, is now building a $1 million LEED-Platinum house which will be the first “100% energy-independent” home in Santa Monica. The piece went on to quote Linda Dishman, Director of the Los Angeles Conservancy, saying that the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED standards don’t do a particularly good job of recognizing the value of building reuse.

However, the NPR story also, in the opinion of Portland's Ralph DiNola of Green Building Services (as written on his blog), "painted a picture that new green buildings can outperform historic buildings and that rehabilitation of existing buildings takes more time or costs more than demolition and new construction, while also leaving the impression that LEED does not adequately credit historic rehabilitation projects compared to new construction projects."

DiNola goes on to look at LEED and historic buildings in his post:

"Perhaps rather than focusing on our desire to have LEED award more points to historic building rehabilitation projects (hopefully they will based upon more advanced LCA methods in the near future), let’s look at the other LEED points that a project can already earn through rehabilitation.  Under LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation (LEED NC), a rehabilitation project can actually earn four points for building reuse. In LEED for Core & Shell (LEED CS), there are five points available plus an additional one point if 95% of the building is reused for a total of six points.  Elsewhere in the rating system there are other nods to existing building rehabilitation projects, such as Energy and Atmosphere Credit 1.  Here, existing buildings get more points for the same level of energy performance compared to new buildings.  For instance in LEED NC, if a rehabilitation projects reduces design energy cost by 24% it will earn nine points, while a new construction project will only earn seven points.  That’s two more points for historic buildings.  There are also two points available for materials reuse, and we have found that existing buildings more often incorporate salvaged materials than new construction projects.  There are also additional opportunities for credit in LEED in the Innovation and Regional Priority credit categories.  In Portland, Oregon for instance, the Building Reuse credit is identified as a Regional Priority credit, thus offering one bonus point to projects that earn this credit. This intentional allocation of points suggests that LEED strategically favors, rather than challenges, reuse, as is sometimes implied."

"Portland has served as a virtual laboratory for sustainable preservation, yet we still struggle with these issues," he concludes. "These are indeed exciting times for historic preservation advocates and green building professionals as American values shift from valuing our history to valuing the new."

Ecoroofs: for the birds?

Photo by Brian Libby 

Two weeks ago I attended an open house at the Audubon Society of Portland, a chance to meet and see up close the organization's educational birds, those injured or otherwise unable to survive in the wild now used to teach about habitat and conservation - such as Jack the Sparrowhawk, Julio the Great Horned Owl, Aristophanes the Raven, and Ruby the Turkey Vulture.

Some of these are not birds ever likely to be common to urban landscapes, even those with a massive forest inside city limits like Portland. Even so, it was such an inspiring site to see these magnificent birds up close that it got me wondering about efforts to re-introduce nature and wildlife into the city through ecoroofs, bioswales and greenspaces.

Portland has become a national leader for ecoroofs, particularly ones that are designed to capture stormwater. But what if the city's collection of green roofs could, once expanded, go a step further and actually become a functional habitat for birds and wildlife - part of a green infrastructure in the city? Ecoroofs do a lot for buildings themselves, insulating them better and reducing energy bills, besides capturing stormwater to prevent runoff. But it wouldn't take much for them to be bird magnets as well.

As it happens, March is being promoted as "Ecoroof Month" by the City of Portland, the Audubon Society of Portland, and the Urban Greenspaces Institute. Events will include "Ecoroof Portland," a free two-day event this Friday and Saturday (March 12-13), as well as an ecoroof tour of South Waterfront on March 27, lectures on March 30 and 31 by London ecoroof expert Dusty Gedge, and an ecoroof tour of downtown Portland on March 31.

As Bob Sallinger, conservation director for the Audubon Society of Portland notes in the organization's wonderfully titled newsletter, the  The Warbler, there are already 200 ecoroofs in Portland, and the city has set a goal of increasing vegetated rooftops to cover at least 39 acres by 2013. An incentive program initiated by the city in 2009 provides property owners with up to $5 per square foot to install ecoroofs. According to the City's ecoroof website Buildings can also receive bonus FAR (floor area ratio) based on three ranges of ecoroof coverage in relation to the building’s footprint: 10-30%, 30-60% and 60% or greater earns one, two and three square feet of additional floor area per square foot of ecoroof respectively.

Multnomah County Central Library ecoroof, photo courtesy Jaysonphoto via Flickr 

Chicago is the only American city with more ecoroof area then Portland, with 534,000 square feet of ecoroof space compared to the Rose City's 423,000 as of 2009. But how are we doing compared to Europe, where ecoroof building leads the world and dates to the 1970s? We've got a lot of catching up to do.

For example, the metro area in Stuttgart, Germany, home of the exquisite Mercedes-Benz brand, has 10.7 million square feet of estimated ecoroof area. Dusseldorf, Germany's overall metro area has 7.86 million square feet. Basel, Switzerland - just the city, not its metro area - had 7.53 million square feet of ecoroof area as of 2007. London has 5.38 million, not including its suburbs and exurbs.

"Portland is particularly well positioned to learn from the European experience with ecoroofs and the emerging trend of biodiverse ecoroofs," writes Jim Labbe of the Audubon Society, also in The Warbler. "Efforts in the United Kingdom, Germany and Switzerland clearly indicate an ecoroof building boom is possible with the right public policies in place. These include adequate incentives and regulation to strongly encourage or require ecoroofs on new development where technically feasible. However we also need local research to help improve designs of biodiverse ecoroofs adapted to our unique climate, flora and fauna."

Photo by Brian Libby 

"By investing in and expanding biodiverse ecoroofs in Portland, we can dramatically expand urban habitat diversity, enrich our local and neotropical bird populations, and help keep nature nearby in our densest neighborhoods."

In 2006 I wrote an article for Metropolis magazine about Tanner Springs Park and its design by German landscape architect Herbert Dreiseitl, which was indicative of an an emerging philosophy regarding wild-life protection in a high-density urban setting. "Instead of just setting aside one or two larger parcels on the outskirts of the city, Portland planners favor also introducing small pockets of nature throughout," I wrote back then. “We’ve done a lousy job of protecting nature in the city until very recently,” added Mike Houck, urban naturalist for the Audubon Society of Portland and director of the nonprofit Urban Greenspaces Institute. “This is a new phenomenon.”

In seeking to become a sustainable capitol, can Portland also become an innovator for nature in the city? Sure, if the Europeans haven't beaten us there first. But Portland also boasts something these older European cities perhaps don't, or at least not in as much supply: enough space, and enough of a connection with the surrounding natural landscape, to enjoy a more substantial connection between city and nature. In that way, the urban growth boundary is as important as ecoroofs. But as with urban planning, it takes both macro and micro level design and implementation to make the unified whole work successfully - a unified plan for growth, and means to make it happen block by block, or in this case, roof by roof and park by park.

Cusack, Steward, Gulick lead BetterBricks Award winners

Photo courtesy BetterBricks 

The 2010 BetterBricks Awards breakfast, held on February 11, honored 12 green building professionals who have, in different ways, championed high-performance buildings in the Pacific Northwest. The awards, presented by BetterBricks, an initiative of the nonprofit Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (and a sponsor of this site), recognize architects, engineers, developers, building owners, building operators, facility managers and other building professionals for their support of high performance, commercial buildings with a special emphasis on energy efficiency in the Northwest. 

Winner in the Architecture category was Dennis Cusack of SRG Partnership. Finalists were Lisa Petterson of SERA Architects and John Breshears of ZGF Architects.

As an SRG principal for almost 30 years and now the firm’s managing partner, Cusack and his partners have achieved 84 percent LEED accreditation of all staff, and 46 LEED equivalent projects.  The firm has committed to the national AIA’s 2030 Challenge. In 2008, Cusack also led SRG’s creation of a graduate research fellowship with the University of Oregon's Energy Studies in Buildings Laboratory. This two year program has further deepened SRG’s collaboration with ESBL to focus on research and firm-wide training/education.

Puget Sound Science Center, photo courtesy SRG Partnership 

Among the recent SRG projects to earn significant green credentials are the Da Vinci Arts Middle School for Portland Public Schools (targeted at LEED Platinum); Mt. Angel Abbey’s Annunciation Academic Center, where 95 percent day-lit classrooms and passively cooled ventilation system have become prototypes for many other projects nationally; and the LEED Silver Puget Sound Science Center in Tacoma.

In the Design Engineer category, the winner was Bob Gulick of Mazzetti Nash Lipsey Burch. A finalist was Nick Collins of PAE Consulting Engineers.

The Facility Manager/Building Operations category saw the award go to a team from Fred Meyer stores. The other finalist was the Melvin Mark Companies Operations Team.

In the Advocate category, the winner was Susan Steward, executive director of BOMA (Building Owners and Managers Association International) Portland. You can find BOMA Portland’s list of advocacy projects here. The organization, for example, is a strong proponent of energy efficiency, and that’s probably a large part of why Steward won. (Wow, that’s eerily appropriate: an advocate named Steward.) An additional finalist in the Advocate was Clark Brockman of SERA Architects.

In the Owner/Decision Maker, the winners were Garrin Royer and Danny McGinley, of Redside Development. The photo below is of the 221 Mollala project Redside previously developed.

Photo courtesy Redside Development 

"We got our start in 2002 by focusing on sustainable commercial redevelopment in Oregon and Washington," Redside's website reads. "Today we’re a thriving, fully-integrated commercial real estate company known for successful projects, steady growth and an innovative emphasis on sustainability.

"A lot of people talk the talk when it comes to sustainability. But we actually walk the walk. By integrating construction, property management and facility services into our company, we’re able to apply a green standard to every aspect of a project — from demo and construction all the way to finishes, paint, landscaping and housekeeping."

This year, the BetterBricks Awards introduced a new category honoring a multi-disciplinary team, which is a group of professionals who joined together for a specific high-performance building project. The winning team worked on the Slocum Center for Orthopedics and Sports Medicine: John Bauman; Dr. Thomas Wuest of the Slocum Center; Whitney Churchill of The Neenan Company; Galen Ohmart of Solarc Architecture + Engineering; Brian McCarthy of CMGS Landscape Architects; and Doug McKay and Steve Korth of McKay Investment Company. Finalists were the team behind 12 West, including Gerding Edlen Development; Greg Goodman, the Downtown Development Group, ZGF Architects, Hoffman Construction, Glumac, and KPFF Consulting Engineers.

Winners were selected by a panel of judges comprised of industry professionals and past BetterBricks Awards winners.

To achieve high performance buildings, award winners have used and promoted best practices such as maximizing local climate in the design, employing early design decision-making and energy modeling, supporting building commissioning and implementing better building operations. Their projects have achieved substantial energy savings, reduced building operation and maintenance costs and enhanced productivity of building occupants.

Keeping the Delta House dream alive - as a Living Building

Image courtesy Nye Architecture 

If you're like me, when you hear the phrase "Delta House," you think John Belushi, toga parties and food fights. But the June Key Delta House project is something very different.

As reported in an excellent February 4 Oregonian story by Larry Bingham (which, curiously, the paper also separately lists as an Associated Press story by Thomas Boyd), the  June Key Delta House project in North Portland is a remodeling of an old gas station began in North Portland. The client is a small group of African American women in the Delta Sigma Theta sorority, who first began planning this home and community center two decades ago.

After a  dozen of the sorority sisters donated $100 each to start a fund, the project inched closer to reality when member June Key purchased an old ARCO gas station at the corner of Albina Avenue and Ainsworth Street in 1992, with the understanding the sorority would pay her back. 

"The site across from Peninsula Park had been declared a brownfield -- a property possibly polluted by the gas station's underground tanks -- though an Environmental Protection Agency review found no contamination," Bingham writes. "Because of its status, the property was going cheap."

Budget is a concern not only because of the grassroots effort behind Delta House, but also because the project follows the strictures of the Living Building Challenge, which was created by our own Cascadia chapter of the US Green Building Council and is arguably the most stringent green building standard in the world.

"Like many of the 50 or so current active members, these women endured the same kind of discrimination that led to the founding of their national sorority at Howard University in 1913. They wanted a home to locate their community outreach projects, such as health and education programs, to fulfill the sorority's mission. They wanted to stop schlepping their meetings to whatever union hall or church basement would have them. They had outgrown each other's homes."

The now-defunct Sienna Architecture Company was the original architect for the Delta House project, with Mark Nye as project architect and Greg Acker as principal in charge. When Sienna folded last year, Nye took over the project under his own banner as a sole practitioner (Acker has since left Portland to work in Abu Dhabi). Many younger former Sienna employees assisted Nye in the design. "There was a little bit of tension, of saying, 'Is this a good idea or not?'" Nye told me in a recent phone conversation. "But I find you end up with a much better product that way."

Photo by Thomas Boyd for The Oregonian 

A key partner for Nye was general contractor Colas Construction, who worked with the architect throughout the design process to keep the budget as low as possible. What's more, Nye says, "Colas is an African American owned firm with long and deep roots in the neighborhood. "They were developing properties in the neighborhood in the early '90s with their own money and are really dedicated to their community."

[Incidentally, the family that owns Colas Construction has ties to Haiti and has started a relief fund in partnership with the Oregon Community Foundation. Go here to assist or find out more about this laudable effort.]

Over the years, many local companies have also made helping the sorority sisters move closer to their dream a part of their pro-bono or charitable efforts. For example, Neil Kelly, the construction company with a showroom just a few blocks away from the Delta House site, donated survey work and created a blueprint in 1992. Benson Industries LLC donated $57,000 worth of glass in 2007. Demolition was provided free earlier this year courtesy of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers as a Martin Luther King Jr. Day holiday service project. The Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability's Green Investment Fund also provided a grant of more than $119,000 for using boxcar-sized salvaged cargo containers. 

Image courtesy Nye Architecture  

Nye, the architect, was raised just across the Columbia River in Vancouver, Washington. After several years on the east coast earning a bachelor's degree at Bennington College, a master's of architecture degree from Columbia University and working in New York for the firm Rogers Marvel, he returned to Portland in 2005.

"I was really impacted by the sort of Kenneth Frampton tectonic ideas," Ny adds, citing the British architect known for advocating regional modernism. "It’s really about using a deep technical understanding to manage design, to sort of design with that understanding. The idea is to try to achieve a higher performance building. The tectonic of sustainability is it’s a much higher game we need to be playing, and the technical aspects need to be bought into line to make the aesthetic work."

Meeting the Living Building Challenge specs means that The June Key Delta House will have to  generate its own renewable energy (via solar panels) and treat its own water. The community center will use rainwater for toilets and divert storm water to bioswales.

Meanwhile, though, even with grants and savings, the Delta House still has $455,000 to raise towards the estimated $755,000 needed for the project going forward. So if you or your company are looking to make a positive community impact, remember that (if I may bastardize The Eurhythmics) these sisters aren't doin' it for themselves - or by themselves.

Beverly comes to Hollywood

photos by Brian Libby 

Portland’s Hollywood district is home to a new mixed-use project, The Beverly Condominiums, at NE 44th Avenue and Sandy Boulevard.

Slated for LEED Silver certification, the five-story building was developed by Gerding Edlen Development, now the largest sustainable building developer in the United States. This, along with another recently completed Gerding Edlen mixed-use project, The 20 on SE Hawthorne Boulevard, represents the developer moving to Portland’s east side. In the past, Gerding principally made its name with larger west side projects such as the Brewery Blocks in the Pearl District as well as Atwater Place, The John Ross, The Meriwether and (more recently) The Ardea in South Waterfront. 

Named after a former famous resident of the Hollywood district—children’s author Beverly Cleary—The Beverly was designed by GBD Architects, Gerding’s most frequent architectural collaborator. If you put together all five Brewery Blocks, The Casey, The Gerding Theater, the OHSU Center for Health and Healing and now The Beverly, The 20 and The Ardea, that’s an incredible number of major projects between this developer and architect in the last decade-plus, all of them fairly large in scale. (And that doesn’t include the work Gerding and GBD have done together in other cities like Los Angeles and Bellevue.) I can’t think of another developer-architect partnership in this city in the current era that has been more impactful. 

The brick and wood-clad Beverly is anchored by a Whole Foods Market and Chase Bank on the first floor, with two floors of parking above. The top two floors are devoted to 53 condominiums (all one or two bedrooms), which enjoy views of Mount Hood to the east and downtown Portland looking west.

 

 

The residential units share a handsome rooftop interior courtyard that feels quite different (more intimate) compared to the massiveness of the overall building. It’s a series of small forms stacked on top of the big, broad base and middle of the structure.

Inside the condos, living areas feature hardwood floors in natural red or saddle oak and wool carpet. Kitchens are built with maple or ash cabinetry with stainless steel hardware.

For optimal indoor air quality The Beverly was built with materials emitting low or no volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or formaldehydes. The building team, led by general contractor R&H Construction, also recycled all construction waste. And The Beverly provides 100 percent storm water filtration.

When I first heard about this project, I was disheartened because constructing The Beverly meant the mid-century modern bank on this site, an elegant glass and concrete structure, had to be torn down. At the same time, there is reason to cheer this new building because of the density it adds to the Hollywood district given its relatively close-in location and its proximity to a MAX stop. The Beverly is part of Gerding Edlen's broader focus on what's commonly referred to in sustainability talk as "20-minute living," or the notion that most of the things we need (jobs, shops, services) can be found within a twenty-minute walk.

 

Viewing the block-sized building from Sandy Boulevard, I enjoyed the façade’s interplay of textures, particularly the natural wood cladding of the upper portions and how it contrasts with the brick below.

Standing on the street outside the building can look monolithic and imposing, particularly towards the back. However, because of the triangular building footprint created by Sandy Boulevard, The Beverly is at its most slender and visually appealing at the point from which it will most people will see it. What’s more, it is very difficult to make a parking garage look humane and vibrant. They’re a necessary aesthetic evil of having automobiles.

  

Naturally, were the parking garage underground and The Beverly instead a three story building with Whole Foods and Chase on the ground floor and the condos directly above, it could have made for a more attractive piece of architecture and a more pleasant experience for the casual passer by. The subterranean parking would also have added significant costs to the project, and the land cost east of the river must not have allowed it in the building’s budget. As a result, the residential units on top of the garage feel less connected to the street and the neighborhood. That makes the building feel less attractive ultimately than comparable projects like Museum Place downtown, which GBD also designed, or the Brewery Blocks that Gerding Edlen and GBD previously collaborated on (one of which has another Whole Foods).

 

To be honest, I'm not sure exactly how to judge a project like The Beverly. It earns very positive marks by a number of measuring sticks, from its sustainability to the attractiveness of its materials to the way it contributes to Hollywood’s future as a higher-density, transit oriented neighborhood. But it’s a bulky building with a parking garage enlarging what would otherwise have been a more intimately scaled mixed use building. And yet I'm also not sure if it's fair to critique a building's design based in part on what might have been in terms of program (with underground parking). In that way, perhaps this project is a reminder of both the opportunities and challenges, economically and in terms of design, along Portland’s continued path towards higher density. 

US Green Building Council president visits Mercy Corps for LEED Platinum ceremony, tour

 Photo by Jeff Amram

Last week, US Green Building Council president Rick Fedrizzi was at the new Mercy Corps headquarters to personally award the building its Platinum certification, the highest possible in the Council's LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) rating system for green buildings.

"Fabulous. Fabulous. Terrific," Fedrizzi said of the building, which was designed by THA Architecture and received an assist from consultants Green Building Services, engineering from Glumac and construction by Walsh. "This is always exciting for me. We talked sixteen years ago when we started the LEED system about how people would someday celebrate their buildings like this. This is a really beautiful space. And a building like this is teaching lessons you can take around the world."

"It is not easy to do LEED Platinum," added Fedrizzi (pictured at left in the shot below). "And I've actually seen LEED Platinum achieved but done wrong. But this building is what LEED Platinum should be all about. It will be a beacon."

 Photo by Caitlin Carlson

"We needed a home that reflected our values and our mission," said Mercy Corps president Neil Kenny Guyer (pictured at right in the above shot) as he accepted the Platinum plaque (which is actually glass) from Fedrizzi, "a place where we could make an impact. We know that climate change discriminates. It affects the poorest first."

"But we knew we got it right the first day [after moving in]," Guyer added, "seeing people meeting on the stairwell with smiles on their faces."

Photo by Jeff Amram 

The Mercy Corps headquarters is comprised half of a historic existing building, the circa 1892 Skidmore Fountain Building (also known as the Packer-Scott Building), and half from a new building, making one unified space. A lot of structural work had to be done to get the Skidmore Fountain Buidling structurally sound and up to current seismic codes, especially when one of its walls was removed to connect the new and old buildings. "“If you had a really strong breeze, this thing would have fallen over,” Ashton Walsh of Walsh Construction told the Daily Journal of Commerce.

The building includes offices for Mercy Corps as well as an Action Center, which the organization describes as "a social studies lab for school groups and a newsroom for everyone. It's an interactive exhibit space dedicated to providing up-to-date, compelling stories from around the world. It's a place where programs -- casual, short-term university seminars, impromptu panel discussions and guest lecturers -- encourage conversation about the issues of the day."

 Photo by Jeff Amram

In order to get the design approved by the city's Historic Landmarks Commission, the exterior of the new half of the building needed to fit in aesthetically with the old Skidmore Fountain building's red brick façade.

THA Architects managed to walk a fine line in this regard, because the new half of the Mercy Corps headquarters feels thoroughly modern even as it is connected to the historic half. The newer portion feels like the repeating of a rhythm, neither a trite neo-historic caricature of old architecture nor a jarring incongruent departure.

The new half of the building's two most visible sides, the east-facing riverfront side and the south-facing one that looks out at Ankeny Plaza, are also distinctive in their use of glass. The riverfront facade takes its cue from Mercy Corps' mission. In researching the client and the project, the architects learned that a connecting thread between the many world cultures the agency serves is just that - thread and weaving. So the glassy riverfront facade faintly resembles a weaving, but again without resorting to postmodern silliness.

Photo courtesy THA Architecture 

The south-facing facade (pictured above) is one of the most important for any green building, because that's where you manage changing solar light, so as to bring in the illumination and warmth when it's needed in the winter and keep it out when it's unwanted in summer. Instead of the usual light shelves one sees on many a green  building facade (horizontal exterior shades extending out at every floor), the THA design utilizes a patchwork of small rectangular shades that are tilted at an angle. Standing inside the building, it made for a dazzling experience watching the winter sun come into the space. And the array of shades also creates a compelling look for the facade of this otherwise boxy building. I love it when beautiful form is born from very useful function.

Inside, the heart of the building, as Neil Kenny Guyer mentioned, is an open stairway that looks and feels like a kind of geometric DNA double-helix. Wood stair treads salvaged from the original building were combined with a light steel stair structure, giving the area both texture and transparency. This is the very middle, interior-most portion of the building, and it's still teeming with natural light.

 

Photos by Jeff Amram 

Overall I am a big fan of the Mercy Corps building, but came away with two relatively small criticisms:

While standing in the new half of the building filled with Mercy Corps workers' cubicles, I was surprised to see that the executive offices were placed along the north and south facades and walled off on the inside with drywall. This means that only a select few will have access to natural light from the building's exterior. It's of course largely moot in terms of light distribution because this same area benefits from an all-glass east facade looking out at the river. But this configuration is still surprisingly indicative of an older, less egalitarian way of laying out administrative offices for executives and rank-and-file employees. I'd have expected either the executive offices along the building perimeter to be walled with glass on the inside, so the light and views are distributed into the space, or to have open desk configurations along the perimeter and executive offices in the middle of the space. During the tour, THA principal William Dann explained that interior-wall glass for these perimeter offices was too expensive, and that Mercy Corps didn't want to be extravagant with budget given the extreme needs of the people around the world the agency serves. But if that's the case, why not put the executives in the middle and the larger amount of regular employees along the glassy perimeter?

Photo by Jeff Amram 

My other disappointment was with the Mercy Corps Action Center, located on the ground floor of the older Skidmore Fountain Building portion of the headquarters. This is a space for the public to come and learn more about Mercy Corps and the needs of people the agency serves. It was designed not by THA, but by noted exhibit designer Edwin Schlossberg (husband of Caroline Kennedy, JFK's daughter).

To its credit, the Action Center has on display some of the tools and equipment Mercy Corps provides around the world, such as an easy-to-build tent dwelling and a rollable donut-shaped water carrier. Most of the space consists of TVs where one watches video about Mercy Corps' efforts and is encouraged to take actions such as contacting a member of Congress.

The video terminals have educational value, of course. Yet I'd like to have seen more of an experiential design approach taken, as was done with the "Real.Life" exhibit at the Medical Teams International facility in Tigard. There you can stand under a simulated 25-foot tsunami wave (like the one that ravaged southeast Asia), or amidst a recreation of Mexico City's garbage-dump, a Ugandan refugee camp, and a Romanian orphanage. The Medical Teams International exhibit is emotionally evocative as it is educational; the Mercy Corps video terminals can be helpful to get one to take action, but any of this could also be done on the organization's website. In this day and age, providing someone with a screen full of information seems a little bit of an outdated concept when they can do so with even a cell phone.

Even so, the Mercy Corps building seems architecturally like a major success. Locating in still-gritty Old Town and renovating a historic structure wasn't the easiest course for the agency, but as Ralph DiNola of Green Building Services wrote in a blog post about the project, "Mercy Corps’ decision to consolidate several offices and locate in this part of the city catalyzes redevelopment momentum and revitalizes this re-emerging neighborhood. Directly adjacent to downtown, the urban locale leverages existing infrastructure, offers employees an array of alternative transportation options and concentrates development to protect agricultural and natural habitats in the outlying areas while infusing the adjacent district with long-term investment and ownership."

Indeed, I love the idea that when one comes west across the Burnside Bridge into downtown, the crossing is bookended by the University of Oregon's White Stag Block on the north side and the Mercy Corps headquarters to the south. Admittedly, it's also a neighborhood teeming with homeless people, but that's all the more reason why it's great to see these entities embracing Portland's urbanity, both in terms of amenities and challenges. 

Photo by Jeff Amram 

As with the rest of the THA Architecture (formerly Thomas Hacker Architects) portfolio, including projects like the Woodstock and Hillsdale libraries in Portland, or their theater for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in Ashland, this is not contemporary design meant to grab you by the lapels and call attention to itself. The Mercy Corps headquarters is a quintessentially Portland building in that it's a good neighbor, a piece of the urban fabric that fits well within its context. Yet a lot of buildings that fit well into their context are a design bore, forgettable as soon as one passes them. The Mercy Corps headquarters is, like Fedrizzi says, a beacon. It walks a deft balance between sober and dazzling, which seems entirely fitting as a physical embodiment of the client and the city.

We'll leave the light off for ya': Melvin Mark, Russell lead BOMA Office Energy Showdown winners

The Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) has announced the winners of Portland’s 2009 Office Energy Showdown. Now in its third year, the Showdown recognizes Portland-area office buildings that have made significant achievements in energy efficiency.

Participation saw a nearly 30 percent increase in the number of participants from the previous year and added nearly four million square-feet of office space to the friendly competition.

Winners were chosen from among 32 properties, representing over 11 million square-feet of office real estate. Challenged to assess their buildings’ energy performance, all participants demonstrated market leadership in quantifying their energy use and establishing baseline data that can be used to track future gains in operating efficiency.

The Grand Prize winner, which receives the “Power Broker” trophy for a property, team, or company achieving an outstanding accomplishment in all-around energy performance was the Melvin Mark Companies, a commercial real estate broker. Melvin Mark's portfolio includes the Sunset Center at Tanasbourne as well as the Columbia Square (pictured above) and Crown Plaza buildings downtown.

Three projects were also singled out for demonstrating the highest energy performance ratings. 1st Place went to the 200 Market Building, managed by the Russell Development Company. 2nd Place was the Gus Solomon Courthouse, managed by the General Services Administration (which probably uses little energy by virtue of being largely empty), and 3rd Place went to the Kruse Woods V project, managed by Shorenstein.

Then there were awards for 'Greatest Improvement', for the properties demonstrating the most significant gains in energy performance rating over the year. 1st place went to the ODS Tower in downtown Portland managed by Ashforth Pacific (now if they could only do something about the hideous sculpture in the front of the building) and designed by ZGF. 2nd Place was Montgomery Park, the Northwest Portland landmark managed by Bill Naito Company. 3rd Place was a tie between the Liberty Centre (Ashforth Pacific) and 1915 Amberglen, managed by KG Investments Management.

If they'd needed to break the tie, I'd have disqualified Liberty Centre for spelling "Centre" like Canadians. That said, Liberty Centre is also noteworthy in that it was originally to be a design by internationally renowned architect Cesar Pelli, before ultimately being designed by Portland's GBD Architects.

Design afficionados (or "designistas", as developer Dennis Wilde has called them) may snicker that many of these buildings are visually unattractive or, in some cases, located in some far-off suburban office park surrounded by surface parking lots. I mean, you never hear someone say, "Have you seen that Kruse Woods V office building in Lake Oswego? What a gorgeous work of architecture! What is that, Koolhaas? Piano, Meier?" But energy efficiency is one of the biggest movements of our time, and part of a regional effort to reduce the need for coal-fired power plants by cutting our power addiction. What some of these projects lack in looks or location, they admirably atone for by being as efficient as they can be.

Oregon schools slow to embrace LEED

Wendy Miller has a sobering report in today's Oregonian: Of the 27 new schools approved by Oregon voters in 2006, only about one in four have achieved LEED certification at any level. That doesn't mean the non-LEED-rated schools do not have sustainable features but rather that they didn't pursue registration.

Still, as Miller writes, going green but not pursuing LEED amounts to a kind of honor system. Should Oregon be requiring its public K-12 schools to earn certification?

"School boards cite cost as the main reason they haven't pushed for such schools," Miller writes. "But there appears to be a move by some districts to build green without the expense and perceived hassle of meeting national standards. Green is a nebulous term, they say, and they don't need a certificate to prove their new schools were built to be sustainable."

The story also says that five schools across Oregon have received LEED certifications, and another 16 new public schools are expected to be approved for certification within the next year. But Miller does not report, by comparison, how many schools there are which are not receiving or seeking LEED documentation.

Miller does, however, delve into the issue of whether LEED certification sometimes steers design and contruction toward decisions that have less to do with the efficiency of the school. "For example, LEED requires contractors to recycle their construction debris and use wood from certified forests," she writes. "It's a holistic approach. School districts that don't pursue LEED may skip those requirements and put the money into the building to enhance its energy efficiency or improve its comfort."

Again, though, a school could conceivably use these arguments that embracing LEED isn't necessary because you can be just as green or greener within school walls than without it, but then abandon a lot of the efficiency measures with "value enginering" (an industry euphamism for cost cutting) when no one is looking.

Then there is the issue of whether LEED certification adds to a project's total cost. According to a study Miller cites by the US Green Building Council, administrator of LEED, these measures can add one to three percent to a project's total cost.

But I have long been hearing from local architects that a LEED-rated school can be done for no extra cost. Way back in 2003, for example, I wrote an article for Metropolis magazine about three Oregon schools designed by BOORA Architects: Clacamas High School (pictured in the diagram above), The Dalles Middle School, and Ash Creek Intermediate in Independence (pictured at the top of this post). In each case, architect Heinz Rudolf and his team at BOORA were able to eliminate enough mechanical and other costs by embracing sustainable methods to make the total construction cost for these projects no larger than that of conventionally built schools.

"I believe in functionalism," Rudolf said in the Metropolis story. "You design a building according to analysis, and everything is in the right place. Then you don't need a big electrical system or a big mechanical system. You take advantage of all the things you can. If you ignore all these good things that nature provides automatically, then you have to overcome them." Each of these three buildings underwent significant commissioning to ensure optimum knowledge and performance of ventilation and mechanical systems, verifying that everything was built the way it was intended to be.

What do the rest of you think: Should Oregon pass a law requiring all public schoos to achieve at least LEED Silver? Or are contemporary energy codes and other measures already assuring more efficient schools without such interference?

As so often happens with Oregonian stories, I found Miller's reporting itself to be well reasoned and written, but the headline -- which an editor usually writes -- made me cringe a little: "Oregon schools: It's not easy, or cheap, being green." The headline takes a more pessimistic attitude than the story itself, casting skepticism on going green at all when Miller's story was about whether to certify. (The paper did the same with a recent story about Memorial Coliseum, expressing skepticism in its headline and sub-healine about a recent tour that didn't exist in the Casey Parks-written story or the tour itself.) Nobody should be arguing at all about the merits of sustainable design and construction itself, especially when it comes to public schools. Students learn better and are healthier, and Portland's own architecture community has already long since proven it can be done at conventional budgets. So as it happens, it can indeed be easy, and inexpensive, to do the right thing.

More than skin deep: Perepelitza on façades

This month at the American Institute of Architects’ Center For Architecture, Mark Perepelitza of ZGF Partnership is exhibiting the results of a fellowship he spent in Europe studying building facades courtesy of the Architecture Foundation of Oregon.

“I think it’s incredibly fascinating,” Perepelitza told me in a recent phone conversation. “That’s what we’re looking at when we look at buildings. And there’s this incredible potential in what they can do.” The architect’s extensive research findings are also being presented on the BetterBricks website.

Perepelitza graduated from the University of Oregon and has been practicing since 1992, with some of that time at Richard Brown Architects as well as ZGF for the past five years.

“Even though there are things we know and we’re doing quite well, there’s a ton we don’t know,” he said of building facades. “And it seems like things are changing and a lot of new potential with the envelope. The fellowship gave me an excuse to focus on it and to follow up with what’s happening in northern Europe.”

If Perepelitza’s itinerary indeed represents cities and countries leading innovation with building envelopes, I need to make studying this stuff more of a priority. He visited six cities in Germany as well as London, Bath, Amsterdam and Copenhagen. “I had a lot of interviews,” he said, “but I tried to keep enough time to just bike around and look at what’s out there.”

 

In this architect’s eyes, building façades are interesting for their duality. They they must marry both performance and aesthetics for example, as a big part of energy efficiency goals and also a major part of how the building looks. What’s more, solutions can be modern and utilize new technologies, or they can be low-tech and come with hundreds of years of proven results. Perepelitza also sees building façades increasingly able to change.

“Rather than a static envelope, there’s this potential for it to be dynamic and to change or at least to respond to dynamic conditions: provide air, light,” he said “All of this stuff is happening outside the building where a sophisticated envelope can manage those things. As the light moves across them it’s changing, which is visually interesting but provides solar control. Or they may be literally changing for shade and ventilation. But there are basic ways of going about it too, like operable shutters on windows, exterior shading or Venetian blinds on the outside of buildings. Before we had electricity and AC, that’s how we kept comfortable. In places like Germany the starting point is assuming not having air conditioning. We’re used to thinking this way a little more in this climate because we don’t have air conditioning as much. In some ways, it’s going back to the ways we used to do things to move forward.”

The image below is a shot of the Wessex Water Operations Centre in Bath, with a double skin to help mitigate climate fluctuations while bringing in plenty of natural light. Among the other buildings he studied were London City Hall, the Deutsche Post Tower in Berlin (pictured above), and the Het Kasteel housing project in Amsterdam (pictured at the top of this post).

Looking forward to the possibility of innovation in our region, “There are a lot of huge hurdles, so it’s not going to be immediate, but I think we’ll start getting a lot more clever about applying these things and getting the most out of them,” the architect added. “There will probably be cases of high profile projects with big budgets doing more, but I’d hope it would not be limited to it.”

The Center For Architecture exhibit of photography and research findings continues through the end of July at 403 NW 11th Avenue.

Highlights from the Oregon Sustainability Center feasibility study [updated]

Yesterday the consortium of public and private entities working on the proposed Oregon Sustainability Center released a draft executive summary and feasibility study.

What does that mean? Best I can tell, it's an extensive research and design process for the building, but does not guarantee that the building will be built. That's to be determined in Phase 2. This feasibility study is Phase 1.

The building was designed by GBD Architects and SERA Architects, with development from Gerding Edlen. Additional team members have included Interface Engineering, Glumac, PAE Consulting Engineers, and Hoffman Construction, with advisors from all three major universities (UO, OSU, PSU), Earth Advantage, the Energy Trust of Oregon, and Guy Battle of London-Based Mattle McCarthy Engineers.

Pictured above is a rendering of the Sustainability Center as it might look once constructed. It would be unfair to judge a building so innovative and so green on its exterior aesthetics. At the same time, it is written in the summary, "The Living Building Challenge is unique, among programs that encourage and evaluate accomplishments in sustainable design, in that it mandates beauty as well as aggressive goals for energy, water and waste systems." It certainly seems like the team has met the aggressive goals. Have they met the beauty mandate? That's a harder goal because it's of course in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I am not crazy about the look of the roof. But of course the design could continue to evolve.

Here is a portion of the text from the 14-page Sustainability Center draft executive summary that explains the process:

The project’s mission is to create a world-class center of excellence in sustainability that celebrates and nurtures the values and strengths of Oregon’s leadership in climate change, land use planning, smart growth, green building, environmental stewardship, civic engagement and social justice.

Predominantly an office building, the Center’s top floors will house a variety of non-profit, government, academic and business tenants who are working to promote sustainability. The public spaces on the first and second floor will serve as exhibit space, including interactive displays and signage that tell the story of the region’s innovations in sustainable technologies, policies and practices. A resource dashboard will let onlookers review the building’s energy and water use in real time. The lecture halls, classrooms and conference rooms on the second floor will support higher education, as well as networking for public, private and academic purposes. This area will also include a visualization lab, which will bring together researchers and community groups to solve regional issues in an experiential way. An active retail environment will anchor the first floor of the building.

The current headcount for the building includes approximately 725 weekday office users and an estimated 1,400 students and faculty, who will utilize the classrooms and conference center each day. Visitors attending events and touring the facility could range from the dozens to the hundreds, depending on the building’s daily schedule.

At the core of the project is a 220,000+ square foot urban, mixed-use high-rise located on the eastern edge of the Portland State University campus, between SW 4th and 5th Avenues and between Harrison and Montgomery Streets. The Center is also the proposed anchor for Portland’s first Eco-District, a neighborhood development strategy that combines high performance buildings with city infrastructure, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, energy use and water use.

The building’s size is strongly influenced by the site’s capacity to generate renewable energy. The 13-story structure is predominately concrete and glass and includes one level below grade. The second floor classroom and conference center is accessible from inside the tower, as well as from a monumental exterior stair, which connects this floor to the ground floor plaza. The tower is crowned with a large structure that supports its primary solar array. Artfully shaped and strategically oriented, this distinctive structure will establish a strong presence on Portland’s skyline.

The 33,500 square foot site (currently a surface parking lot) is located on the south end of downtown Portland, on the eastern edge of the PSU campus. It is a nexus for public transit with bus, streetcar and light rail systems all immediately accessible either on-site or on surrounding streets. The design anticipates a permanent streetcar alignment that will diagonally bisect the site.

The front door to the Center will be SW Montgomery Street. Efforts are underway to transform eight blocks of Montgomery into a green street, which will celebrate creative stormwater reuse. Coupled with its display of sustainable site features, the Center’s urban design and integration with the district’s green street will create a unique and extraordinary place for individual reflection, social interaction and public events.

The current site is zoned RX (a classification for residential uses) that allows only limited commercial uses. The site also has a height restriction that limits new buildings to a maximum of 125 feet. As a result, a legislative zone change will be required, as part of the entitlement process, in order to allow the development to proceed as currently conceived. A strategy for enacting the zone change has been developed with guidance from the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability.

The Living Building Challenge is unique, among programs that encourage and evaluate accomplishments in sustainable design, in that it mandates beauty as well as aggressive goals for energy, water and waste systems. The Center has been designed in this spirit, integrating and often expressing the technical features that enable the building to perform to the highest green building standards.

UPDATE, 6/27: I'd like to respond to those who have said it was a "copout" of me to not criticize the building's look.

What I meant was that I wanted to judge the building fairly and holistically. It's very very innovative when it comes to performance and sustainability. That is worth our praise.

At the same time, I do agree with the more negative commenters that the rendering makes this look like an ugly work of corporate architecture. I'd also heard these same whisperings of concern from the city in recent weeks, that the project was turning into an Edsel.

We should also keep in mind, however, that the rendering above is just that. It's one rendering. This is not the final design, nor is it a complete look at the building.

The team putting this building together is absolutely first rate when it comes to green credentials and track record. That should not be underestimated. These people are world leaders in their field. That's why they were selected.

At the same time, I'm not sure beautiful buildings are the strong suit of GBD, SERA and Gerding Edlen. They all design handsome enough architecture, I suppose. But it's not the focus. The Oregon Sustainability Center figures to have that same set of strengths and weaknesses.

Green building is unquestionably the dominant movement in contemporary architecture today. But unlike modernism or postmodernism, it's not an aesthetic movement. It's not to say there can't be beautiful green buildings, but the guts are more the focus than they used to be. That's not a bad thing at all. Architecture absolutely has to transform in order to meet the future's energy needs. Being great green architects and being the conjurers of aesthetic beauty do not always go hand in hand.

But, having said that, it would not have been impossible to create a net-zero energy building with more than net-zero looks.

A man struggling: Guy Battle comes to Portland

Britain's Guy Battle, director of the multi-disciplinary Battle McCarthy Consulting Engineers, has become one of the leading environmental building engineers in the world. And this Wednesday, he'll be in Portland to deliver the latest talk in the Cascadia Green Building Council's Transformational Lecture Series.

Guy Battle is not really "a man struggling," as I called him in the title of this post; more like a man succeeding with flying colors. But I had to have some fun with his name, which sounds like a description of some gladiatorial bout.

Guy Battle? Nice to meet you. I'm Fella Conflict. Have you met Dude War? The image at left was one of the first that came up when I did a Google image search on Mr. Battle's name.

Battle’s lecture is titled, “Low Energy Buildings and Sustainable Communities: Designing for the Zero Carbon Economy,” and will take place at the White Stag Block (at SW Naito and Couch) at 5:30pm with a short reception to follow.

As the press release says, "Battle has been responsible for developing a unique approach to sustainable development while still keeping an optimum balance between the environmental impact, social benefit and financial return both for his clients and the community. Battle has worked on a wide range of international projects and with many world-renowned architects including Foster and Partners, Will Aslop and Sir Richard Rogers. During the past 15 years, Battle is credited with developing an innovative approach to sustainable environmental master planning including Greenwich Peninsula and ParcBIT Sustainable Masterplan, Mallorca."

I saw a presentation at the Greenbuild conference in Chicago two years ago for the Mallorca masterplan, and it was incredible: practically an entire island running on net-zero energy usage.

Also, a few years ago Battle spoke in Portland during the 2005 Greenbuild conference and I did a Q&A with him afterward. Here is a portion of that discussion:

How did you become interested in green building?

I went to the University of Bath in England, and I was educated in architecture as much as engineering. As a result, I learned to speak architecture, to understand its language, which is very important. During that period, I also had a number of tutors who professed interest in the environment. I picked up on that, and my thesis was on intelligent buildings skins which reacted to their environment. From there, I got interested in architecture that responds to climactic conditions.

Would you advocate that there be more integration in the educational process between architecture and engineering?

There’s not nearly enough. In this country [USA] it’s amazing to me that so few architects are able to speak to engineers and vise-versa. Half the problem is the architects don’t invite engineers to the table early enough. And if they do, the engineers feel somehow restricted, unable to take up the conversation. I think that’s due again to the education of engineers. They’re not taught to be creative.

How does this compare to Europe?

There’s a big difference. There’s a wealth of European engineers who are amazingly creative, and at the moment taking over the States. You’ve got Buro Happold, you’ve got Whitby Bird, you’ve got Arup, you’ve got Tim MacFarlane, you’ve got ourselves. These are environmental structural engineers who know how to be creative with their designs.

And of course green building requires greater collaboration between architects, engineers, and the rest of the building team.

Sustainable design means a greater level of integration. As an architect you have to conduct more people into the process: the engineer, the acoustician, the landscape architect. That’s why at our practice we have structural engineers, M/E/P engineers, and landscape architects, because we believe we have to produce an integrated package that will support the architects.

And then there have also been studies linking green buildings, or specifically daylit buildings, to improved human performance.

How far along do you think we are to taking green building mainstream?

If you look at the bulk of building in the States, 75% or 80% is people who are ignoring the issues. But I think there is a trickle-down effect. Obviously, though, the most basic means of change is the code. The bottom line is that if you don’t obey the code, the building is illegal, so it’s always the barest minimum. That has to be the starting point. And then you have things like incentives, which organizations like BetterBricks are a part of. It helps architects and engineers to do analysis work. And then you’ve got the straightforward incentives to do with photovoltaics or wind turbines or whatever it might be. So I think carrots alone will not make changes. You need sticks and carrots. 

You believe that within five or ten years the US will be more advanced than Europe in green building.

Yes, I passionately believe that actually. Coming here to Portland, you’ve got some architects doing amazing stuff, and engineers supporting them. I really believe that once you guys create a bit of momentum, there will be no holding back, because ultimately green building is driven by money. Once the US realizes that, it will be developing the best products and processes. And that’s why our firm is working here in this country. I’ve seen a massive sea change in attitude just in the last twelve months. It really is very exciting.

In your lecture here, you talked about a Battle McCarthy project, the Peckham Library in England, and how its architects, Alsop and Stormer, believe green building need not operate according to any particular stylistic principles. Do you agree?

There is a big debate about whether green buildings should look green, or whether they should just look like a piece of great architecture. And I think both are valid, but one thing that’s definitely true is that a green building does not have to wear its credentials on its sleeve. Alsop’s work is all about following a green agenda but very much interpreting it in a very artistic fashion. I think that’s actually very important.

Relatedly, it seems unfortunate that even though we live in an age of celebrity architects, few of them seem to have incorporated green principles into their design. There is a bit of a disconnect. I might go so far as to say there’s a new movement in architecture that’s environmentally driven, but it’s found outside the celebrity environment, although [Norman] Foster is doing some interesting stuff. If you go back to architects like Louis Kahn, Walter Gropius and even Le Corbusier, however, before air conditioning was invented much of their work took an environmental form. They were really interested in climate.

What aspect of your career gets you the most excited about getting up and going to work every day?

I enjoy the challenge of forging design with good architects. You cannot do better than to sit down with an architect and sketch for three or four hours together. You just can’t beat that feeling, because it’s the whole essence of giving birth to a design. Working with SOM, KPF, Gensler, Grimshaw, Farrel, or Foster, these are all architects who, given a set of criteria, will all do something different, and that is very interesting and challenging for an engineer, to allow that creativity to occur and enhance it. But looking at the bigger picture, sustainability is also what drives me and my practice. The ideas are rote sometimes, but they’re not easy to come by. To be able to deliver them is another sort of layer that is also very important to us.

Do engineers deserve more credit?

Yes, I think so. Engineering is the hidden hand. They have an enormous amount to contribute to architecture, but too often their contribution is gently put to one side. I think it’s something that should be celebrated. You look at someone like Peter Rice or Neil Thomas, Chris Wise, Guy Nordenson, and a host of other fantastic engineers, and they don’t really get the recognition they deserve.

NY Times looks at DaVinci daylighting scheme and its "halo" / "donut"

The online version of today's New York Times includes on its 'Green Inc.' blog a post by Libby Tucker about a prototype classroom at DaVinci Arts Middle School that may indicate a future design path as Portland and the nation renovate and retrofit schools sustainably over the coming decades.

The prototype green classroom addition, which is under construction at Da Vinci, utilizes natural daylighting, passive heating and cooling systems, solar roof tiles and other features that achieve energy efficiency 70 percent over Oregon building code requirements. The 1,500-square foot music classroom, designed by SRG Partnership with the University of Oregon’s Energy Studies in Buildings Lab, is set to earn a LEED-platinum rating and net-zero energy use.

The space can be amply lit with daylight year-round and even in the grayest overcast conditions thanks to what's called “the halo,” a kind of high-tech chandelier conceived by G.Z. "Charlie" Brown that distributes natural light even throughout the space from a large central skylight. It's so effective that there’s no need to flip on a switch at all during the school day.

I previously blogged about the halo - or as Brown originally called it, "the donut" - in January of 2006 when it was part of a mock classroom prototype at Mt. Angel Abbey. (SRG's Kent Duffy spearheaded its use in a project there.) And I've long written about Brown's efforts, including a 2003 New York Times feature called "Beyond the Bulbs: In Praise of Natural Light".

I was very glad to see Libby Tucker's post, because if more people had a chance to experience the halo/donut, I'm sure this thing would become standard in practically every single-story architectural space where people spend any amount of time. Windows on the walls are great, especially in providing a view. But in lots of spaces, the light they distribute is uneven, bringing bright light near the window and making interior spaces away from the window seem all the more dark. Skylights are great, but they are essentially still just directing light straight down. Brown's halo/donut does for natural light what a ceiling fan does for air.

Meanwhile, all this talk of donuts has me hungry for a Hostess old fashioned glazed. No wonder they changed the name to halo.

Sustainability Center design team studies options, seeks feedback

Kyle Andersen of GBD Architects wrote recently with an intriguing invitation.

His team at GBD, along with colleagues from SERA Architects, Gerding Edlen Development, Green Building Services and others, have been working on a design for the Sustainability Center for Excellence for the past several weeks after winning the commission from the City of Portland. Anderson is lead designer for the project along with SERA's Kurt Schultz. The building seeks to follow the strictures of the Living Building Challenge.

Normally architects and designers can be reticent about showing a design while it's still in progress, but Anderson and company are instead seeking public input.

"It has been a very dynamic process beyond any previous work we have done to date," he said via email. (And that's a bold statement given that GBD has been responsible for numerous LEED Platinum-rated buildings.) "So many variables play into solving the Living Building Challenge puzzle.  Collecting all of your water needs, and treating all of your waste on site seem rather rudimentary now given the struggle we have had trying to solve the net zero on site energy component.  This in the end has been one of the largest challenges to give 'form' to the concept thus far."

"We believe in the end that we will be able to demonstrate to others a path to get there.  The exciting news for all of us involved in this project, is that it is looking more and more like it is a feasible concept.  A large urban building that meets all the needs on site under the Living Building Challenge.  With a precedent such as this, it is exciting to think of all the possibilities this opens to how we build and live within the built environment we create."

The process got going in April with a charette at GBD's offices designed to generate ideas. From that came five key concepts, with the accompanying text taken from the Sustainability Center blog:

(1) Appropriately scale systems for optimal performance.

"As we consider systems that may be incorporated into the OSC, we need to determine the scale or size of the system that will provide the most cost- and resource-efficient delivery of services. Some systems make sense when applied at a building scale, while other systems may make more sense at a district scale, providing services to many buildings." 

(2) Make less do more

"One way to significantly reduce the environmental impact of the OSC will be to reduce the total amount of materials used in the project, thereby reducing the resource investment in the manufacture, transport, installation and maintenance of those materials.  For this to be successful, those materials that are incorporated into the building must provide as many functions as possible."

(3) Design for resource equity.

"As we evaluate resource budgets for the building, and in order to meet the Living Building Challenge, we must not only consider our own needs for resource use, but also ensure that we consider the needs of other species.  For instance, the Living Building Challenge requires that the building use only the water that falls on the site.  This can be used to provide the water budget for the building, to meet the needs of the occupants and equipment.  However, when we consider “water equity”, this begs the question: Is it fair to other species if we use all of the water that falls on the site, and what if every building did this?"

(4) Integrate natural systems to benefit all species.

"Inclusion of natural systems is essential to the success of the OSC. Ongoing work clearly shows the value of incorporating biophilic design approaches into the workplace environment.  Literal, facsimile or representative systems from nature provide psychological as well as performance enhancements for humans.  At the same time, natural treatment systems for stormwater, wastewater and air quality provide an ecosystem service without significant chemical inputs and energy use.  Through thoughtful design, these systems can also provide habitat for other species and further enhance the local ecosystem."

(5) Recognize that people are the life in a living building.

"The Living Building Challenge represents a dramatic paradigm shift in the way that buildings are designed, built and occupied.  A vacant building can exist without any resource inputs, but once occupied, a building requires resources to support the health and wellbeing of the occupants.  The existing building stock does not provide occupants with information on building performance so that they can make informed decisions about resource use.  A Living Building provides occupants with a feedback loop on individual resource use and overall building performance as well as providing appropriate choices to support occupant comfort and well-being.  This approach necessitates the active participation of the people in the building to ensure that resource budgets are met for energy and water use in order to meet the net-zero energy and water prerequisites.  With this new approach, occupants become part of the essential functions of the building."

Last week, the design teams presented their work to the OSC working group, including Alice Wiewel, director of capital planning for the Oregon University System; Christine Theodoropolous, head of the University of Oregon School of Architecture; and Sergio Palleroni, fellow and professor at Portland State University’s Center for Sustainable Practices and Processes. Much like a standard academic design review, the session was informal, emphasizing candid feedback and dialog.

According to the OSC blog, "The earliest models were a study in 'bracketing the extremes' of biophilic form, designing from the most pure (a raindrop) to the most abstract (the “torque”). With the exception of the Courtyard scheme (described below), all early designs were for a 250 foot tall building. This included three schemes shown here: the "raindrop", "nautilus" and "kidney bean" schemes, seen here.

The raindrop, Nautilus, and Kidney Bean schemes each included an atrium that punched light all the way through the building, tying, in the design team’s view, the entire building together. Later analysis revealed that a top-to-bottom opening would not effectively achieve the daylighting the team was after, and also posed structural (mechanical pressure/comfort) and safety concerns.

Then there is the Torque scheme. It pushed the building-as-metaphor idea one step further, mimicking in its upper levels the behavior of a sunflower as it unfurls and tracks the sun across the sky. For the building, such a twist, or torque, gradually changes the building orientation from the urban form of the block toward a solar-friendly orientation.

Then design team also looked at a courtyard configuration with a shorter, squattier building, but ultimately feedback led them to look at a hybrid of the kidney and nautilus concepts. "At play in these designs," the OSC blog says, "is the push and pull between the building’s program, which at last check called for 250,000 to 260,000 square feet, and the total surface area necessary on the site to house all of the photovoltaic panels required for the building’s energy production. The grid-like panels in these models represent those PV panels." 

Last week, the core project team agreed to pursue a design that achieved net zero energy, first, and fit the program, second. This decision, combined with revisions to the Nautilus-Torque hybrid, led to the latest 220,000 square foot design. The picture at the top of this posts represents their very latest model.

“Whatever design we end up with in the feasibility study is purely a vehicle to demonstrate the feasibility of the project, it is not necessarily the final design,” Kyle Andersen said. “It is one of many potential designs. But the bigger picture is that it demonstrates that a Living Building of this scale can be done. It could look like this, it could be square, it could be rectangle, it could be tall and skinny…But we’ve also found that there are parameters, how much PV do you have, so how long is the building facing south, and so on…it’s a balancing act. But [this is] definitely not the final design.”

Cascadia Green Building Council's Jason McLennan talks about this week's Living Future "unconference"

Starting Wednesday, the Living Future conference will be taking place for three days at the Nines Hotel downtown this week.

Presented by the Cascadia Region Green Building Council, Living Future is labeled as "the unconference for deep green professionals" on its website. An accompanying video says, "Together imagining a world of living buildings, living sites and living communities....Learn what it takes to go deeper, to a world of true sustainability."

Leading-edge thinkers of the sustainability movement like Paul Hawken have spoken at Living Future in the past, as well as Sim Ven Der Ryn, the latter of whom has a prescription for the green movement that I love the sound of, even if I'm not completely sure what it means: going from "rigid instability to flowing resiliency".

Recently over email I interviewed Jason McLennan, CEO of the Cascadia Region GBC, about Living Future and it what it means for the chapter.

Q: How do you see Living Future fitting in to the spectrum of different design and sustainability conferences out there for architects and others in the industry to attend like Greenbuild?

A: A lot of other conferences are geared to appeal to all knowledge and experience levels; or they are more introductory.  With Living Future, we are trying to reach the deepest green leaders of the movement, targeting those who want to make huge leaps forward.  Those who attend Living Future are at the forefront of the green building movement and are looking for the next level – and we cater to that need with cutting-edge topics, revolutionary ideas and presentations from thought leaders.

Unlike other events that can top 1000+ people – where you might run into everyone you want to speak with – we keep Living Future purposefully intimate to allow multiple opportunities for participants to engage and network with each other.  Living Future is a think-tank of sorts – bringing leaders together and giving them the chance to share ideas.  Living Future draws passionate people, and we are trying to cultivate that energy to drive great change.

What are some of the different messages that the keynote speakers will be bringing, or are there any of them in particular you think people will be excited to hear?

All of the keynote speakers will be exciting.  I mean, they are keynotes for a reason –

Janine Benyus is going to talk about biomimicry and what lessons we can draw from nature in the designs of our buildings and cities, as well as cutting-edge research being done around the world.  I think people will come away from her presentation completely awed and inspired.

 Thomas Crum will have an impact on a more personal level.  His message is more tied in with the theme of the conference (Cultivating leadership. Begin with One).  He helps people reach their full potential through embracing conflict and challenging situations in order to create more positive outcomes.  These two are great bookends: One is about the influence of the outside, natural world and the other is focused inward on the potential we have within ourselves.

Denis Hayes is one of the most insightful people on a national level.  As a pioneer in the green movement, he will bring wisdom, as well as new perspectives.  Plus, I think he is very entertaining.  As for my talk, I will share with people some really interesting findings we are learning from the LivingBuilding projects out there, as well as challenge people to think differently about the scale of change we need to make in the world.  I plan to get everyone worked up!

There's a political party in power now that's more favorable to sustainable policies, but the economy has been in dire straits. How would you characterize the set of political and economic conditions in which green building exists right now?

Everyone is hopeful that the policies of the Obama administration will lead us further and quicker down the path of change.  Environmental issues were part of his platform, and there is stimulus money coming down the pipeline to those in our industry, which bodes well for growth of the green building movement.

At the same time, I think we have all been distracted – some for good reason, with jobs being lost and companies failing.  But we can’t put a hold on environmental issues!  These are issues that are bigger than the current economic crisis.  The current state of the economy is just a symptom of the larger issues we will have to deal with somewhere down the line.  I am concerned that we are allowing our days to drift from the larger threats and becoming complacent with the small victories.

What are some of the lessons you and the organizers of Living Future can take away from running past events like this?

Living Future is still a relatively new event for us, but I think we are getting quite good at it! People seem to love the conference and our feedback has always been stellar.  Evidence of this is in the sell-out crowd this year – we are going to be packed to the gills!  This is a good sign that we are in fact delivering something truly special.

How does putting on Living Future fit within the context of other Cascadia GBC endeavors throughout the year?

Living Future is the glue that holds it all together for us; it is our big annual summit.  Living Future is the focal point of the work we do, and the event we tie our board and branch meetings to.  It is the single most important event for us in bringing a large percentage of our members and sponsors together.  Cascadia is made up of a vast geographic area; we have members in Alaska, British Columbia, Washington and Oregon.  Living Future provides a great opportunity for everyone to check in, re-energize and connect face-to-face.  And it is these connections that really drive us forward.

Habitat for Humanity takes the LEED with young designers' help

Although the open house to celebrate Habitat for Humanity’s first LEED-Platinum rated project was held a month ago, it’s not to late to applaud the Webster Street project.

Consisting of two duplexes (a 900 square foot two-bedroom and a 1200 square foot four-bedroom), the Webster projects are 40 percent more efficient than code requires. They are the first LEED-rated Habitat homes of any kind in Oregon, let alone Platinum-level, and two of only a handful nationwide.

The homes were built with a slough of volunteers and professionals lending their time, money and efforts: Walsh Construction, Cascadia Green Building Council, and Bank of America, among others.

But particular credit goes to the two young designers involved: Scott Mooney and David Posada.

Mooney works at THA Architecture and Posada at GBD Architects, but they became friends while attending the University of Oregon’s masters degree program for architecture (they graduated in 2005).

The homes grew out of a design competition for young architects sponsored by the Cascadia Region Green Building Council in 2007 to design a LEED-certified duplex on a lot owned by Habitat for Humanity Portland/Metro East.

“Over the course of the last 18 months, David and I have been volunteering our time on nights and weekends (independent, but with the full moral and resource support, of our respective firms) to adapt our concept into something more feasible and affordable that would allow Habitat to fully realize this unique project,” Mooney told me recently.

Habitat for Humanity already builds relatively efficient homes with Energy Star appliances and Earth Advantage sustainability methods. But the Webster Street projectm even with donated goods and services, was more expensive and required greater technical expertise and collaboration.

Stepping up, Bank of America gave $75,000 to help pay for materials, and their employees regularly volunteered to work on the construction. Just as importantly, Walsh Construction provided a pro-bono site supervisor (not usually a presence on simple Habitat homes) and recruited skilled construction-industry volunteers.

The Webster duplexes are built with metal roofs and structural insulated panels, which drastically reduce heat gain and loss through the building. Two cisterns capture rainwater for irrigation in the summer. Stone for the shared courtyard came from the driveway of the house that once stood on the site. The utility room houses a 50-gallon water heater that is so efficient it warms the house through a floor heating system while providing hot water for other uses. The homes have concrete floors with radiant heat. Countertops in the smaller home are Paperstone, richly colored and made of 100 percent post-consumer recycled paper in Hoquiam, Washington.

It’s enticing to think of a future in which Habitat for Humanity builds all of its homes to LEED specifications (certified or not) and involves real architects. Were we to pair great design and construction with the hugely beneficial efforts of Habitat, our community could help revolutionize what is already a very laudable nonprofit.

In the meantime, lets give our thanks and praise to the many professional and amateur volunteers making this project happen, but especially to Mooney and Posada for both a a transcendent design and effort.

Sustainability Center open house today

The public and the press and invited to attend an informal open house on the Oregon Sustainability Center, Friday, April 10 from 4 pm - 6 pm. The open house will be held at Gerding Edlen Development's offices in the Brewery Blocks at 1120 NW Couch Street, Sixth Floor.

The open house is the culmination of a week-long series of workshops and technical design sessions held April 6-10 to explore the vision for the Center as well as its more technical aspects: programming, energy, water use, the building envelope and materials. The Center’s development team and public sponsors will be present to discuss the project.

Public sponsors of the Center are the Portland Development Commission, City of Portland, Oregon University System, Oregon Living Building Initiative, Portland+Oregon Sustainability Institute, and Portland Community College. The development team of Gerding Edlen Development, Green Building Services, GBD Architects and SERA Architects is currently completing a feasibility study for the Center as the first living building to be located in downtown Portland.

Jennings to Realtors: yes we can (and already have)

Recently the Commercial Real Estate Development Association, which for some weird reason is abbreviated as NAIOP, issued a press release asserting that increases in buildings’ energy efficiency of 30% or more over energy codes aren’t economically feasible.

John Jennings of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance has penned a response, which essentially says, “Uh, excuse me? You don’t know what you’re talking about.”

The NEEA is the parent organization of BetterBricks, which is a sponsor of this site. This post is not intended in any way to act as advertorial, but I felt Jennings’ open letter to the NAIOP is worth passing on, even if it didn't touch upon one my other big real estate pet peeves: capitalizing the word "Realtor".

Here is Jennings' response:

"The recent press release by NAIOP attempts to throw cold water on the growing momentum for sustainable energy efficient buildings.

Those who have been designing, building and promoting high performance buildings for a long time are finding the study very difficult to swallow. But let’s all use it as a learning opportunity.

First of all, just in the Northwest - where electricity rates are lower than those used in the study - there are a lot of buildings that have achieved significant levels of energy efficiency. These buildings range from small offices, to schools, to university buildings and even healthcare facilities. Over 50 buildings in Washington and Oregon alone have achieved levels better than 30% over code. 

A recent study of 121 LEED buildings by the National Buildings Institute found that on average these buildings were achieving savings of 28% with one-quarter above 50% and some as high as 75%. NBI’s Getting to Fifty program also contains a register of buildings achieving close to, or better than, 50% savings. For anyone needing more evidence, there is the USDOE High Performance Building Database and the magazine High Perfomance Buildings, that presents detailed case studies every month.

Several Northwest buildings further illustrate what is achievable. These include the Idaho Central Credit Union office in Chubbuck, Idaho; Banner Bank in Boise, Idaho; OHSU Center for Health and Healing in Portland, Oregon. The Idaho Central Credit Union office is a typical small city bank branch with 68,000 square feet built in 2007. It achieved savings of 35%. The 180,000 square foot Banner Bank building built in 2006 appears on the outside to be a fairly conventional mid-height office building. Yet it has received LEED Platinum certification and measured energy savings have been around 48%. According to the developer, Gary Christiansen, these savings were achieved at no incremental cost. 

A recent post occupancy evaluation of the OHSU project has found building savings to be close to 45% over ASHRAE 90.1-2004, with an incremental cost for energy efficiency measures of less than 1% of total cost. 

What bothers me the most though is the approach NAIOP took to the analysis and the way the results were disseminated. They base their claims on energy simulation modeling of one existing building design rather than research the state of the market. As a result, they lock out many of the key elements designers can manipulate to improve performance. No consideration was given to building orientation, massing, daylighting, shading, or natural ventilation.

The study simply adds a number of conventional efficiency measures to a generally inefficient base building. This obviously has limitations. It is understood by most building scientists and efficiency experts that there is an economic limit for simple additive efficiency measures. Estimates range from savings of 25% to 40%. To achieve higher levels of savings cost effectively requires an integrated design approach where cost efficiencies result from down-sizing or eliminating mechanical and electrical equipment due to synergies between systems (i.e. taking advantage of the interactive effects between heating and cooling and lighting, etc). 

The press release uses the study findings to take a stab at policies seeking to set building energy codes to higher levels. Codes set the legal minimum and thus level the playing field. Codes do not set one method for all as stated by the press release. Instead, codes set prescriptive requirements for each climate zone and also provide an optional performance path target to allow designers to find innovative ways to meet those targets. 

Now we need to begin working together to figure out how to best achieve the 2030 Challenge targets for all new construction over the next 20 years. This process is beginning with numerous “Net-Zero Building” conferences and articles. We need to broaden the dialogue to include the real estate and development community."

A green lodge: Emerick Architects builds Portland's first stand-alone LEED Gold house

Recently I visited a new house by Emerick Architects that was designed for the firm's husband and wife principals, Brian and Melody Emerick. The Northwood Residence, as it's called, is slated for this year's was part of last year's Street of Eames modern homes tour and is, as part of a US Green Building Council pilot program, one of the first single-family home in the nation to achieve Gold LEED status.

The house, located on a one-acre parcel in the West Hills, is at the end of a windy road on a site other builders hesitated to build on for several years. A large McMansion, you see, would have had difficulty fitting here. Yet the Emericks' home feels substantial even on a comparatively smaller floorplate. And making this site work when others walked away allowed the Emericks to take advantage of a spectacular view. The property abuts 300 acres of forest Forest Park and Terwilliger Parkway and looks through the trees at a panoramic view to the east.

From outside, the house looks like a ski lodge, reminiscent of regional landmarks like Timberline Lodge. The exterior is a combination of naturally pigmented cement plaster and natural wood siding, topped by a zinc alloy roof, all of which will be desirably durable. The architects sought to showcase an alternative to the look of gyp board.

The house's mass is also broken up by making the garage a separate structure connected by an elegant covered walkway. It also slopes down the site in a way that conforms subtly to the topography. There is also an onsite stormwater treatment system.

Inside, the lodge-like feel continues with Douglas fir windows, doors and ceilings, Oregon white oak flooring, and furniture made from Red Alder by local craftspeople.  No matter where you are in the house, there is natural light pouring through. That not only eliminates the need for electric lighting, but allows the Emericks (including their two daughters) to look out at the incredible wooded view. And all the small details of material, spacing and craftsmanship feel extra sound: this is an exceptionally well built house.

Overall, both inside and out, I was impressed by how the Northwood Residence has the feel and style of traditional architecture and interiors, yet never feels the slightest bit trite or faux. The home is a modern interpretation of traditional forms, materials and spaces, yet it's crucially important that the architects achieved the right balance. Personally, I'm extremely sensitive to the appearance of faux-traditionalism or neo-historicism, and yet I loved the job the Emericks and their colleagues did here.

The home was constructed using 100 percent wind power, and 80 percent of construction waste was recycled. The design also boats minimal site disturbance; the Emericks preserved a centuries old maple tree. And the exceptionally solid building envelope, featuring 15 percent more insulation than code stipulates, in addition to extensive use of concrete, means the home will hold its thermal mass very well, keeping it cool in the summer and warm in the winter - even though the house was also built with 15 percent fewer framing materials to save cost.

Emerick Architects previously oversaw designs for the Ford Building renovation in Southeast Portland, and the firm also designed an acclaimed restoration of the Porter Building in the Pearl District and Grand Central Baking's headquarters in North Portland. 

I also enjoyed the vibe when I visited the firm's downtown Portland offices. All the employees seemed to be sitting on exercise balls instead of chairs at their desks, and a jovial B-52s album was playing in the background. Talk about a "Love Shack". Keep up the good work, gang!

Getting electricity from rivers without damming (or damning) habitat

Before the industrial revolution and the invention of electricity, communities all over the world had water mills that relied on river currents turning turbines (a wheel in the water) to produce products like flour, lumber and textiles. In fact, the water mill is an iconic form of the 18th and 19th centuries.

Last night on the Discovery Channel, needing a distraction from the Blazers' last-second loss, I learned about an alternative energy project curiously similar to the thinking behind old water mills: Putting turbines in rivers. The documentary focused on a company called Verdant Power that has experimented with putting turbines in the East River, which has a fast tidal current (about 6MPH) because of its proximity to New York Harbor and the Atlantic Ocean. (Time has also covered these efforts.) The turbines are currently powering a Gristede's supermarket on the upper east side, but could do much, much more.

When thinking of hydro-electric power, we usually think of massive dams like Bonneville, which threaten fish and wildlife populations while also transforming local topography in a heavy-handed industrial way only the can-do World War II generation could come up with.

But what if, instead of extending hydro power across the width of entire rivers, we did it in a more benign way like Verdant is doing in the East River? Imagine a series of individual turbines that look and function like wind turbines, only they're buried under the Willamette River or the Columbia River in a way that's benign to the local wildlife habitat and shipping lanes? Although neither the Willamette or the Columbia has the same current speed as the East River, with Portland at more or less the confluence of two waterways, there ought to be ample opportunity.

Of course, efforts like these require millions in venture capital to get going, and today's stiffened credit markets either won't allow that or will scare investors from trying. Even so, given that river and tide currents are completely predictable in a way that winds aren't, I'd think this kind of alternative energy source, once the right investment is made, could accomplish a great deal.

I've spoken with locals in the green building community who one day envision solar panels on top of practically every Portland home. What if someday, in complement to that, scores of underwater turbines in the Willamette and Columbia were powering hundreds of homes, or all of our local government facilities?

Gerding Edlen, GBD and SERA win Sustainability Center job (updated)

The Portland Development Commission has announced that Portland's Gerding Edlen Development, in collaboration with GBD Architects and SERA Architects, has been selected for the Sustainability Center of Excellence commission.

"After lengthy deliberations, debate and discussion," the announcement reads, "[the] Committee unanimously agreed that Gerding Edlen Development is the most qualified and experienced team to deliver this complicated project within the schedule and meeting as many objectives as are likely to be met for this ambitious project (e.g. satisfying LEED Platinum and Living Building Challenge requirements, fostering and promoting Oregon leadership in sustainable design and development, coordinating and creating creative and innovative partnerships and opportunities, identifying innovative funding sources to make this project feasible, advancing and facilitating an inclusive programming phase, etc.)."

It's hard to argue with the track record Gerding Edlen brings to the table. The Request For Proposal process that decided this job was geared toward experience and qualifications, and the ability to get the job done. Gerding and its architect partners certainly fit those criteria.

In the "Notice of Intent to Award" that PDC produced, they also list all 11 entities that made proposals for the Sustainability Center.

Besides the aforementioned team finalists led by Gerding, Holst Architecture, Winkler Development and Ethos Project Management, there were proposals from Brad Cloepfil's firm, Allied Works, as well as THA Architecture, Ankrom Moisan Architects, Hennebery Eddy Architects, Skylab Architecture, Philadelphia hotelier real estate developer Citizen & Company, and Urban Renaissance Development of Baltimore and Urban Renaissance Group (based in Seattle with office in Portland) with SRG Partnership and Lease Crutcher Lewis.

I'll be the first to admit I'm sometimes biased towards certain acclaimed architects and designers. So it's surprising to me that Allied Works and some of the other award winning architecture firms that made proposals were not even made finalists. Haven't many Portland architecture enthusiasts been yearning for another major Brad Cloepfil building ever since the Wieden & Kennedy headquarters was completed a decade ago?

I think it'd be wrong to second-guess PDC or the selection committee for making the choice they did given the structure of the whole process. At the same time, I wonder if the Sustainability Center of Excellence is an example of the need in Portland's public projects for a new way of making selections, one based on design more than qualifications. Gerding Edlen, GBD and SERA might have won a design competition too; it's not to take anything away from their efforts. But did this process satisfy everyone that the decision was made the right way? I'm not making accusations here so much as raising questions.

Meanwhile, the overall attitude toward this project ought to be positive, even if there is some second-guessing about the larger question of how we award public projects. These are tough times for everyone in the building industry, and the Sustainability Center is an example of hope and optimism when we sorely need it.

Additional note, March 5: I previously mis-identified one of the non-finalist teams as Urban Renaissance Development of Baltimore. In reality that team was Urban Renaissance Group (based in Seattle and has a Portland office) with Portland architecture firm SRG Partnership, contractor Lease Crutcher Lewis, and the University of Oregon's resident sustainability guru, G.Z. "Charlie" Brown. My apologies for the error.

Reactions to Sustainability Center proposals

Although I was not at the presentations late last week by four teams vying for the city's new Sustainability Center commission, a few friends of Portland Architecture were. So I'd like to pass on their thoughts.

First is architect and artist Fredrick Zal, a regular at such events:

Walking into the City Council Chambers of Portland, Oregon for the Living Building Challenge’s Sustainability Center of Excellence, I was prepared to be WOW’d, but I got even more.

I have the greatest of respect for Gerding Edlen Development, as they have made their name and significant money over the last number of years as a community partner and by marketing their sustainability. They certainly were the favored team walking into the room, with their established relationship with PDC, their standing contract for the Block 153 property, and having harnessed the best and brightest of Portland, Oregon to work with them on their many LEED projects. But, something went awry.  Mark Edlen continually harped upon his Oregon base for the entire team, even though they have a significant presence in Los Angeles, and marketed themselves as ‘all about California’ for their San Diego Civic Center proposal, which also happens to be their poster child for sustainability and their ‘Liveable Place Index’.

Facing a competing team with Brightworks, that could have potentially shown just about every one of the same project images as GED, since they worked together on most of them, I believe that they were hedging their bets against the German influenced Brightworks/Behnisch team. It was for good reason, as Stefan Behnisch simply put, “We cannot keep doing what we have done in the past and expect change”.  Or, in the words of Albert Einstein, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it”.

I am not saying the GED created the problem.  Certainly not!  They have done immense work to pioneer the LEED efforts by constructing many prototypes for the US Green Building Council to champion.  Dennis Wilde was able to show a number of ‘on-the-boards’ sketches of how sustainability can influence design form and orientation.  But, their projects have primarily been a series of boxes with layers that only address LEED marketing, but not core design issues or lifestyle choices.  With all due respect to GED, SERA and GBD, we have seen many examples of what their collaboration and financial willingness constructs.  GED’s Civic Center design with ZGF could serve as inspirational for this proposal, but they left it out of the presentation, as they determined that the design was not financially viable and withdrew from developing it for San Diego.  GED’s primary LEED consultant, Chris Forney of Brightworks put it clearly, that sustainability is not about a bunch of checklist, but it is about creating work that is regenerative to our community and our Planet Earth.

In November of 2008, Ethos Development split into three components and Brad Wellstead is heading up the Project Management division.  It was awkward for him to be presenting his exceptional project management skills on complex projects, which is very relevant to Phase II of this project, when he needed to be acting as the Phase I developer for this RFP, which he is not.  Even though Brightworks is hands-down the best sustainability consulting firm in Portland, they unfortunately do not have the important developer component necessary to secure the federal stimulus dollars from Governor Ted Kulongoski that David Van't Hof spoke of.  Even with Stefan Behnisch showing the impressive Institute for Forestry and Nature Research in Wageningen, the Netherlands that he co-designed with the scientist user-group, which is perfectly synonymous with the P+OSI/OUS/LBI [Living Building Initiative] tenants, he ran out of time to revive his team.

Similarly, Holst Architecture was only able to show a few projects of minimal relevance to the intent of the Sustainability Center.  They are one of the best mid-density mixed-use designers in town, and prior to the dismissal of Randy Higgins, one of the best designers in town, but they have lost their inspiration.  Their presentation was flat.  It did not help that Bruce Fowle, of FXFowle, barely scratched the surface of the benchmark New York Times Building that they managed for the Italian designed Renzo Piano Building Workshop. The scale of development presented by both Pettigrove Venture and Equity Community Builders again was just not inspirational in scale nor execution.

The Winkler Development Corporation with Busby Perkins + Will, and LRS Architects team is clearly the best selection for a number of reasons:

Jim Winkler, and his sometime business partner Bob Naito, have been the silent force behind the urban revitalization of Portland in all of the areas that other developers did not have the patience or vision to touch.  It is great to see them moving in this ecologically-minded direction.Winkler has always contributed greatly to the culture of Portland, following in the model established by the Schnitzer family.

LRS shows great potential with their Cosmopolitan Point Tower for the PDC.  The project not only shows how they can collaborate as the Architect of Record with the IBI/HB Architects design team, but it also resolves the long-standing partial development of the Cascadian.

With the adjacent historic Harrison Court Apartments on the National Registry, it will be important to have an architect as sensitive as LRS was in the adaptive reuse of the deSoto building, where their offices reside in the Pearl District.

Busby, Perkins + Will has an immense portfolio of sustainable, commercial, educational, and mixed-use projects that are at the leading edge of architectural best practices.  [Some of which were shown as ‘best’ examples in the presentations of their competition this evening.]

The Dockside Green Development in Victoria, British Columbia demonstrates how bio-filtration can not only be beautiful, but a community amenity.  [The GED and Ethos teams bury their bio-systems, or tack them on as an afterthought, instead of engage them holistically.]

The Laurentian University Cooperative Freshwater Ecology Unit in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada not only harnessed future technologies in a harsh environment, it acts as an educational model for others.  This will be important in allowing the Sustainability Center to teach the public and professionals.

And lastly, the VanDusen Botanical Garden in Vancouver, British Columbia shows the direction of their current / future works, which is greatly influenced by the sinuous femininity of Mother Earth and would certainly serve as a beacon for tourists and researchers to engage the City of Portland as a world leader in Creative Sustainability.

Then there were the comments of John Jennings. In full disclosure John works for BetterBricks, which is a sponsor of this site. I'm posting his thoughts, however, because I thought they were worth reading in their own right:

Last night after sitting though all the presentations by the four finalists for the Sustainability Center of Excellence to be located in downtown Portland, I asked myself which team would I choose.

Although there were world class leaders in sustainable design on the teams and enough images of really dramatic and substantial buildings that purportedly come close to meeting the ambitious Living Building goals, I came away thinking a recombination of some of the team members might be best. Pick the best of each specialty from each team and mix them back into a super team. Too bad we can't do that. But what makes a good team anyway? 

What kind of team can assure successful delivery of this highly ambitious innovative project that aims for zero carbon emissions, no off-site energy resources consumed, zero waste, all water use from captured or reused water from the site, with no wastewater discharge, a healthy interior environment, and at the same time beautiful and inspiring.

From our experience, it will require a team with a client that sets clear and significant performance goals (done here by the project sponsors); a developer that is open to ideas, willing to take risks and innovate; an architect able to work collaboratively with lots of team members (not a visionary "starchitect"); engineers with out-of-the box thinking empowered by significant technical expertise; and a sustainability consultant with a holistic view (not just a list checker).

In fact, all team members need to be well versed in ecosystem thinking (ecology, systems dynamics, regeneration, balance, biomimicry, biophilia, etc.). The whole team must be open to community input. And to ensure effective integrated design, the team has to be able to easily and quickly communicate on a regular basis.

Team presentations tonight at City Hall for Sustainability Center from interesting mix of local and international firms

From 6-8PM tonight in the Portland City Council chambers at City Hall (1221 SW Fourth Avenue), presentations by finalists for the Sustainability Center of Excellence to be located in downtown Portland at SW Fifth Avenue and Montgomery Street. Following proposals, a project team will be selected to conduct a Development Feasibility Analysis.

One word of caution to those thinking of going: these presentations will not be about design proposals for the sustainability center. That stage hasn't arrived yet. Instead, the presentations will mostly, I'm told by Daniel Spero of the Portland Development Commission, be about the teams articulating their experience.

The finalists who'll be making presentations tonight at half-hour intervals beginning at 6:15, are teams of architecture firms, developers, and other specialists and consultants:

• Gerding Edlen Development with SERA Architects and GBD Architects

• Holst Architecture with FX Fowle, Pettigrove Venture and Equity Community Builders LLC

• Ethos Project Management with Behnisch Architects, Brightworks and Regenesis Group

• Winkler Development Corporation with Perkins + Will and LRS Architects

Of these, the Gerding Edlen partnership with SERA and GBD would be the most familiar to Portlanders, with Gerding and GBD doing the Brewery Blocks, Casey Condominiums, and Gerding Theater at the Armory and several other projects together, and Gerding and SERA previously teaming up for The Civic condo-apartment project.

Holst Architecture and developer Pettigrove Venture have worked together before; it's my understanding Pettigrove was a partner in Holst's Belmont Lofts. Pettigrove also developed renovations like the Triangle and Fitzgibbon Glass buildings. FX Fowle is an acclaimed New York firm that will add gravitas to Holst's already strong design and sustainability reputation. FX has done work in Dubai, India, China, Denmark, the New York Times headquarters (with Renzo Piano), and much more. Their design for 11 Times Square is pictured at right.

I'm not familiar with Ethos Project Management, but Behnisch Architects has offices in Stuttgart, Germany and Los Angeles. They've done a hugely impressive array of work all over Europe, Russia and the United States. Brightworks, a Portland firm providing green design services, would also be a good addition to that team.

Winkler Development is another Portland firm; Jim Winkler redeveloped the Adidas Village from the old Kaiser hospital on North Greeley, as well as a renovated building in the Yamhill historic district downtown and the DeSoto Building in the Pearl housing numerous art galleries. Winkler hired LRS Architects to do the Adidas project's interiors, and they have gained some major green building experience in China, as I reported a few days ago in a separate post. Perkins + Will is a huge Chicago-based firm with offices throughout the world. They are a previous winner of the AIA's prestigious national firm of the year award. Right now they're doing, among hundreds of other projects, what will be the nation's largest US courthouse in Los Angeles, a LEED Platinum rated skyscraper (pictured at left) with an impressively massive atrium.

Although the Portland Development Commission's RFP seemed to focus on local firms, I'm excited to see the combination of local and national/international firms involved. I haven't personally decided which of these teams I'd like to see get the job. There are naturally lots of practical considerations to be made. The Gerding/GBD/SERA team would, again, be the most familiar to Portland, but maybe they have a design in mind that's more mind-blowing than all the rest. Holst and FX Fowle would be an intriguing combination, and the job would be another step up for Holst into the stratosphere of larger-scale projects. Perkins + Will is also intriguing, and it would be nice to see Jim Winkler get the job after being on a treadmill for much of the last decade trying to get One Waterfront Place built.

Again I must ask, though: Are the parameters of the competition ideal for producing the best possible design for this Sustainability Center? Are teams of developers and designers delineating their experience the best way to pick, or should we have some sort of design competition where we're judging the building itself? I love design competitions and seeing the potential building before picking a designer. But it isn't always so simple. With the Portland aerial tram, for example, Sara Graham and her firm, AGPS Architecture, were my least favorite of the four finalists. But Graham did a superhuman job once the team was picked, ensuring that the integrity of a quality designed was maintained throughout the construction process. Other finalists like UN Studio and SHoP had me more excited, but I couldn't possibly second-guess the Graham selection now, in hindsight.

Meanwhile, do the rest of you have any preferences yet?

113 LEED projects and counting for Green Building Services

A few weeks ago, after reading that Portland sustainable design office Green Building Services had achieved its 100th LEED-rated project, I wound up chatting about the milestone at the firm's downtown Portland offices with principal Ralph DiNola, CEO Jay Coalson, and marketing manager Andrew Scott. When I got there, they told me the LEED project count is actually up to 113 by now...and counting. If you look at a list of LEED rated projects in Portland, their name is on almost every one.

GBS started in 2000 as an offshoot of Portland General Electric, but became a separate entity in 2005. In that time, they have consulted architects, building owners and engineers on a wide array of sustainability issues. Green Building Services' first two projects were also landmarks for LEED in Portland: Viridian Place and the Ecotrust building, the latter of which was the first LEED-rated historic renovation. Another project, Providence Newberg hospital, was the first LEED gold-rated medical center. "Those project really set the stage for our expansion and growth," DiNola said. At the same time, he adds, "We don't think so much of ourselves as to only work on leading-edge projects. I still love seeing that light go on," when new sustainability converts come on board.

Besides projects in Oregon, GBS has worked around the country, from academic buildings at Florida Atlantic University and a green bank in Texas to analysis on expansions to the San Francisco airport. DiNola also has a longtime relationship with the US Green Building Council itself (which administers LEED). He's on the team that writes LEED user manuals, and also interprets credit requests.

In addition to consulting and other services, GBS also offers training, which is something DiNola says is key for architects during a downturned economy. "Everyone is waiting for something to happen," he explains. "Training is all the more important now. It gets you prepared for what's next."

Speaking of the recession, DiNola notes a shift in green buildings: more clients are looking at existing buildings to renovate green instead of starting from the ground up. "New office buildings that didn't happen because of the economy, those owners are upgrading green instead," DiNola said.

With increasing green renovations, though, there is more chance for friction between the strictures of building sustainably and historic preservation. DiNola originally studied historic preservation as an undergraduate (before getting his master's degree in architecture), and believes more old buildings ought to be allowed to transform without such rigid historic strictures.

DiNola suggested the National Trust for Historic Preservation National Park Service consider a multi-level system in which certain historically significant buildings are designated worth preserving as close to the original look as possible, but others have more leeway to, say for example, enlarge windows to allow in more daylight. "It's black and white the way the National Trust does it today," DiNola added. "We ought to be able to say, 'This building is maybe less architecturally significant, so we can do more to it.'" Europe is much more open about enriching old buildings, for example.

He also cited green programs like the Living Building Challenge. "You're more apt to be successful with new than old projects," DiNola said. "But that embodied energy (of a renovation project) is just sitting there."

Green Building Services isn't the only office of this kind providing consulting, analysis and training for sustainable buildings. Brightworks would probably be classified as a competitor, and that firm has done much for green building in Oregon too. But GBS and DiNola, who was one of the first sustainability experts I interviewed over a decade ago, deserve some kudos for their role in Portland's green revolution.

PDC extends deadline for Sustainability Center proposals

The Portland Development Commission has issued a Request For Proposals, initially due today but now extended to February 18, for a new Sustainability Center in downtown Portland near Portland State University.

The mission of the project, according to the RFP, is “to create a center of excellence to promote sustainable development practices and sustainable business development… to shape, accelerate and measure a coherent sustainability agenda for the City of Portland and the region focused on the following: growing the green job market, developing and advocating for sustainability public policy, promoting Portland as a ‘living laboratory" of sustainability through catalytic projects, and positioning Portland and Oregon as an international leader in sustainability through partnerships with "best in class" academic institutions and leadership cities.” The project is expected to achieve LEED ‘Platinum’ status, net-zero energy usage, and meet Living Building Challenge strictures.

The property is situated at the south end of downtown and abuts the PSU campus at its Urban Center Plaza, bordering SW Montgomery Street, SW Harrison Street, and SW Fourth and Fifth Avenues. Although it’s not yet written in stone, the size of the project would be about 220,000 gross square feet, with retail at street level and potentially housing above in addition to Sustainability Center spaces.

PDC acquired the site in 2004. In 2006, Gerding/Edlen Development was selected to redevelop the property as a mixed-use project focused on workforce housing. Subsequently, GED and PDC entered into a Memorandum of Understanding that is  set to expire July 31 of this year. If the Sustainability Center team decides the feasibility study results warrant moving forward with construction, the MOU with GED would be terminated and a new agreement will be negotiated with the project team.

The evaluation will be carried out on a 100-point scale, with 20 points going to 'qualifications and experience of proposer', 20 points for 'qualifications and experience of key personnel', 25 points to 'project approach and methods', 10 points for 'price proposal', and a final 10 points for promoting minority or women-owned firms and emerging small businesses in subcontracting opportunities. If you're playing at home, that means 40 points out of 100 for experience. The 'project approach and methods' category seems ambiguous to me; could that have to do with design quality?

Reading the RFP online, I initially was confused about how it’s not intended as a means of definitively selecting the architect, contractor or even developer for the job. Perhaps the words 'feasibility study' might have tipped me off. It’s not a promise to build the project. ““If, after the Feasibility Study the Center is deemed to be desirable and feasible,” the RFP reads, “the Proposer and/or Project Team could be invited to provide development, design and construction services for the Sustainability Center.” That would be Phase 2.

Governor Kulongoski has requested $80 million in funds, but apparently that isn't yet a done deal. Also, Spero said, part of the contracted work in the feasibility study calls for the Selected Contractor to identify sources of anticipated funding (City, PDC, OUS, other) and/or private financing and sources of alternative and innovative financing, including available tax credits.

When I spoke with Dan Spero of PDC, he emphasized that in addition to pushing back the submission date from February 6 to February 18, there have also been addendums to the RFP stating that submitting teams need not be led by a developer. There are certainly financial questions to be resolved by any entrant, but theoretically it could be an architecture firm and contractor going for the job without a developer. I wonder if this move could help the project to have more of a high-end design focus and not just sustainability per se.

Given the deep recession, this commission would be a very coveted one for some sustainability-minded architecture firm. One can only assume, particularly with Gerding Eden already involved, that their past collaborators like GBD Architects, Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership, SERA Architects, or even THA Architecture would be going for the job. At the same time, it would be contrary to the spirit of this project for anything about the developer and architect selection to seem knee-jerk or otherwise without proper openness and deliberation. And when I spoke with Spero, he seemed to understand the importance of this being an open opportunity for all.

For all we know, the Sustainability Center may not be built for years, or even at all. But PDC, even without funding apparently secured, has a timetable for going forward. “Given the significance of the Center to the City and State, the preferred timeline is for the selected proposer and project team to conclude Phase 1 activities by spring 2009,” the RFP says, “with design and permitting occurring in 2009, and construction starting by late 2009 or 2010 and completed by 2011 to 2012.”

So you tell me: Is the Sustainability Center a mirage, a great opportunity, or something in between? And is there anything to be said here about the city's RFP process in general?

City announces new green home grants

The Bureau of Development Services is accepting applications for the first round of funding from the Portland Energy Efficient Home Pilot (PEEHP). This pilot program seeks to generate residential construction with grants for up to 20 energy efficient homes for sale in Portland.

Grants will be awarded to builders or teams to substantially offset the costs of constructing two homes that perform above the energy efficiency level of the 2008 Oregon Energy Code standards. The first of the two homes each builder or team constructs is to be 15% above the 2008 Oregon Energy Code and the second is to be 30% above the 2008 Oregon Energy Code. The program expects to award grants of approximately $10,000 for both homes built by any one builder or team.

The Bureau of Development Services expects to award approximately 4 grants in the initial release period, and possibly 4 additional grants in a second release period. More than $113,000 has been committed to this grant program by the City of Portland and industry partners, the latter of which includes the Homebuilders Association of Metropolitan Portland, the National Association of Homebuilders, NW Natural, Pacific Power, and Portland General Electric.

The Energy Trust of Oregon's New Homes Program will provide support during the design phase to help builders meet energy efficiency requirements and will provide consultation during construction to verify the final performance of each home.

The RFP and application materials can be found online here.

OSD seeks Green Investment Fund applicants and feedback for new High Performance Green Policy

Yesterday I spoke with Alisa Kane of the city's Office of Sustainable Development about two efforts underway there: the 2009 green Investment Fund and the city's new High Performance Green Building Policy.

In partnership with the Energy Trust of Oregon and other local agencies, the OSD is seeking proposals for its 2009 Green Investment Fund. This year as much as $425,000 will be awarded to individual projects that significantly conserve water and energy, reduce stormwater entering the sewers and recycle or reuse a substantial amount of materials.

The GIF began in 2001 to support innovative and resource-efficient building projects in Portland and has given away over $2.5 million in the last five years to 32 different projects. In 2005, the GIF evolved into a partnership between OSD and the City of Portland's Bureaus of Water and Environmental Services and Energy Trust of Oregon, Inc.

The GIF awards innovative, comprehensive and transferable projects that excel at whole building integration, energy efficiency and on-site renewable power generation; material reduction, recycling, salvage and reuse; potable water conservation; stormwater management and improving watershed health, and community connectivity.

Among the projects previously funded are the design and installation of a bioreactor at OHSU's Center for Health and Healing (designed by GBD Architects) that captures, treats and reuses 15,000 gallons of wastewater daily for toilet flushing, cooling tower make-up and irrigation. The GIF also funded the first permitted structural insulated panel home in Portland, a living wall that captures and filters rainwater, and the restoration of a historic farmhouse and surrounding property into an educational center demonstrating rainwater harvesting and reuse, on-site renewable power generation and advanced energy efficiency upgrades. Research also was supported on methods to reduce air infiltration through historic double hung windows and the feasibility of capturing and reusing excess heat from the coffee roasting process. And the GIF helped bankroll the transformation of a former gas station into a community center constructed with recycled shipping containers, reclaimed glass panels and salvaged building materials that is on track to become one of the first Living Building Challenge projects in Portland.

Deadline for applying for the Green Investment Fund: February 2, 2009.

Meanwhile, since December 4, the OSD has also been seeking public comment on the draft High Performance Green Building policy (the comment period closes January 20, 2009). The proposed policy provides incentives and technical assistance for new construction and existing buildings that incorporate advanced green building measures.  Leveraging a commercial and residential 'feebate' system to promote green building practices for new construction projects and disclosure of building performance measures for existing commercial buildings, the draft policy seeks to cut carbon emissions from buildings, reduce energy costs for tenants and homeowners and accelerate the growth of local green jobs.  The draft green building policy was developed by OSD staff with input from stakeholders in the design, development, construction and real estate sectors. It's also a toned-down version of the policy first announced by Commissioner Dan Saltzman at the Greenbuild conference in Chicago in 2007.

There will be a presentation of the policy proposal to the public on Tuesday, January 6, from 3:00 pm to 4:30 pm, in the Portland Building Auditorium, at 1120 SW Fifth Avenue. 

Of course the OSD is set to transform under the Sam Adams administration into the Bureau of Sustainable Planning and Development. Of that move, the OSD's Kane told me, "I feel very positive about it. I think our initiatives will be better integrated into the planning of the city. I think there'll be some learning on both sides, but it will only strengthen us in the long run."

Morgan Building strip-down: BOORA's new LEED Platinum office

Whenever an architecture firm gets to work on its own new or remodeled office space, it's an opportunity: to show the firm's prowess, to work without the constraints of a client, and to change the culture of the firm itself. In recent years firms like SERA Architects and Thomas Hacker Architects have done just that with ultra-green new office jobs, while Zimmer Gunsul Frasca and Ankrom Moisan have new HQs in the works for the next year or two.

BOORA Architects thought building a better office would entail moving out of their leased space in the Morgan Building downtown, on SW Washington just around the corner from Broadway. After all, it was an old building they didn't own. But after extensive research into the building itself, negotiations with the Morgan's owner, and a thorough examination of where BOORA's employees live and how they arrive at the office, the firm decided to stay put.

However, if you visited the BOORA office before its renovation and see it today after a $2.5 million renovation, these are two very different spaces occupying the same 26,000 square feet.

In the old office, the entry lobby provided not the slightest glimpse of architects working. Today one can look in any direction coming out of the elevator and see wide open spaces, tall exposed ceilings, beautifully rough-textured wood and concrete, and a focus on communal teamwork over individual desk work.

As it happens, the circa-1913 Morgan Building was designed and built before air conditioning was prevalent and when electric light could be unreliable. So it had excellent preconditions for two very important 21st century green building needs: natural daylight and ventilation. An independent analysis by engineering giant Arup (collaborators with Koolhaas, Foster Herzog & De Meuron and virtually every famous architect working today) confirmed that it had ideal green possibilities. 

The Morgan was designed by legendary early 20th Century Portland architect A.E. Doyle, whose firm was then called Doyle, Patterson & Beach. Doyle also designed the Central Library, Benson Hotel, US National Bank, Meier & Frank building and numerous other downtown landmarks. Pietro Belluschi also got his start in Doyle's office.

The brick and terra cotta Morgan building is E-shaped on the back, so it allows natural illumination to penetrate deeply into the space. Once BOORA took out the ceiling, revealing another three feet of space, they were halfway there to a much more pleasant environment. But they left the giant concrete columns exposed, which both figuratively and literally anchor the space.

The natural ventilation system is rooted in operable windows, but that's not where things end. BOORA installed exterior temperature sensors to alert employees to when outside temperatures are ideal for opening the window, and then when they do, ceiling fans spread around the air. (That could also work well when someone has too much chili for lunch.)

BOORA's office renovation isn't just physical, either. Traditionally the firm has operated like a series of small studios, each headed by a particular principal. It's felt in the past, for example, like Heinz Rudolf runs an in-house firm designing green K-12 schools. John Meadows, Stan Boles, Michael Tingley and others divide up the various condos, university projects and arts facilities. or something along those lines. But the new office emphasizes that everyone works or at least weighs in on every project.

In that way, BOORA's new office and the culture they're trying to create seems to resemble a lot of firms, particularly the larger sized ones, in endeavoring to create a more collaborative, democratic design environment. After all, if you're a talented young architect, where would you rather work: at a place where the principals make all the key decisions, or one where you have a voice?

Right now BOORA is heavily involved in work at Stanford University, and they also have their second large condo for Hoyt Street Properties about to complete: The Encore. The firm has been around for many, many years. In fact, their 50th anniversary is this year. Having the right kind of office is, as for any company, the way to insure they stay around for another 50.

Being downtown also affords BOORA some nice views of the central city. I took these shots on a recent visit. Sure beats the dumpster my office looks out on. The above images, by the way, were provided by the firm.

BetterBricks Awards honor top green practitioners

Last Friday morning in a crack-of-dawn breakfast ceremony at the Hilton, the BetterBricks Awards honored members of Oregon's design and construction community for their efforts in creating energy-efficient architecture.

BetterBricks, a nonprofit initiative of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, is also a sponsor of this website. Hopefully this post will not seem like advertorial-style promotion for BetterBricks. But I deemed the awards a relevant story to report.

The awards were given out in six categories: (1) owner/decision-maker, (2) architecture, (3) engineering, (4) facility management/building operations, (5) advocate and (6) emerging leader. Continuing a trend from past years, honorees came from Gerding/Edlen Development, architecture firm SRG Partnership and mechanical engineer Interface Engineering, as well as a few other sources.

The owner/decision maker award went to Mark Edlen, head of Gerding/Edlen Development. This was probably a no-brainer for the jury, considering that Gerding is not just Portland's most active and large-scale green developer, but one of the nation's.

The architect winner was John Schleuning of SRG Partnership. Schleuning is the 'S' in the firm's acronym, and has guided SRG through decades of very solid design work. I actually associate Kent Duffy as much or more with SRG's most significant projects of recent years than Schleuning, but Duffy's boss is a guiding hand for the whole firm and has an impressive long track record. Duffy has previously won a BetterBricks award anyway. SRG doesn't have as high a profile as other comparable medium-sized firms. They've largely sat out the condo boom of the last several years, for example, instead focusing on public buildings such as libraries and universities. Even so, much of SRG's biggest projects include leading edge green design, such as the Lillis Business Complex at the University of Oregon and an expansion of the Mt. Angel Abbey campus beside Alvar Aalto's masterful library there.

The engineering award was a tie, between John Gray of Interface Engineering and Mike Kaplan of Kaplan Engineering. Again, I'm not sure how BetterBricks chooses what individuals from these firms receive the prizes. When I wrote about Interface's work on the GBD Architects designed, LEED Platinum OHSU Center for Health & Healing, for example, it was Andy Frichtl from that firm leading the charge. But Frichtl is a past winner for Interstate, so I guess they decided to spread it around. Regardless, Interface is a strong force in Portland green building because the mechanical engineering they offer is hugely responsible for an efficient structure: they create the guts of the building that uses energy to heat and cool the structure.

Salem Public Schools' David Furr and Kathleen Hill were the facility management winners, while Renee Loveland of Gerding Edlen Development was recognized as this year's top advocate. Dennis Wilde of Gerding is usually considered their big long-term sustainability advocate, but he's also a past winner. Naomi Cole, sustainability coordinator for Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership, was honored as this year's emerging leader. She must indeed be emerging: I've visited ZGF countless times and have never met Naomi or heard her name. But ZGF does increasingly impressive work with strong sustainability credentials, particularly when working with Gerding Edlen.

Meanwhile, congratulations to all the winners. And as we look ahead, who are some of the developers, architects, engineers and other players deserving of recognition?

Offices compete in BOMA energy efficiency showdown

The local chapter of the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) has released the results of its second annual 2008 Office Energy Showdown, which recognizes Portland-area office buildings that have achieved a superior level of energy efficiency. Winners were chosen from among 25 entries, representing over 7 million square-feet of office real estate.

The Grand Prize winner was the 200 Market Building in Portland, owned by Russell Development Company. "It is amazing that a building over 30 years old can compete and win against new buildings designed with energy efficiency in mind," said owner John Russell. The 384,000 square-foot commercial building achieved outstanding energy savings using a variety of strategies, including dimming lights in the four-acre parking garage during periods of inactivity.

In the "Most efficient buildings" category, 1st Place went to One Pacific Square in Portland, 2nd Place to Robert Duncan Plaza in Portland, and 3rd Place to 1915 Amberglen in Beaverton. For buildings under 60,000 square feet, the prize went to Oregon Square 729 in Portland.

Honored for the biggest gains in energy efficiency were McGillivray Place in Vancouver, Robert Duncan Plaza in Portland, and Lloyd 700 in Portland as well as Oregon Square 830 in Portland for properties under 60,000 square feet.

In addition to the nine winners, eight properties in Portland qualified for the Energy Star label by ranking in thetop 25th percentile among the most energy efficient buildings nationwide: Columbia Square, Crown Plaza, Liberty Center, ODS Tower, OHSU Center for Health & Healing, PacWest Center, Standard Plaza Building, and the US Bancorp Tower.

Participants, who were required to be BOMA members, tracked over 24 months of utility consumption using the Energy StarPortfolio Manager. This data was used to generate benchmarking scores for each building that evaluated energy performance. The nationwide Energy Star rating system accounts for weather, building location, use and operating characteristics; a score of 75 or higher on the 100-point scale qualifies a property for the Energy Star label.

As a companion to the competition, BOMA Portland is presenting, in partnership with BetterBricks (a sponsor of this website) and Green Building Services, a series of educational programs focused on energy management and sustainable building strategies. The series began in February and will be offered through November 12.

Build It Green tour: one day, 20 homes

If you're planning to embark on the Build It Green homes tour on Saturday, hopefully your gas tank is full (or legs ready to pedal) and you're free of other commitments. Sponsored by the City of Portland's Office of Sustainable Development and several other eco organizations, the self-guided tour includes 20 different homes in the city (although one, go figure is way out in Estacada).

In Southeast Portland alone, there are five stops, including a remodeled 1961 ranch house owned by landscape architect Pat Lando, three new houses, and even an RV of all things that was outfitted with biodesel fuel, a composting toilet and solar-powered stove. In Northeast Portland there are six stops, including everything from shipping container architecture to multifamily low-income housing to a garden-ensconced accessory dwelling unit. The North Portland wing of the tour includes mixed-use retail space and the Peninsula Park co-housing development. The Southwest Portland side of the tour includes two properties I've blogged about previously, one designed by Jeff and Tracy Prose of Building Arts Workshop and the other spearheaded by Charlie Weiss.

Not that this is important, but the tour is technically called the "Build It Green! Tour of Homes", but I couldn't bring myself to put an exclamation point in the middle like that. And while this is a terrific event, I personally wish it didn't conflict with college football.

'Leapfrog' houses: a non-architect's LEED Platinum adventure

Charlie Weiss isn't an architect. Nor is he the football coach at Notre Dame (that would be Charlie Weis, with one 's'.) But the two houses he's seen constructed in southwest Portland off Terwilliger Boulevard are some of the greenest yet to be built in Portland.

Weiss, who studied environmental design in the 1970s and is now a partner in a market research company, worked with Lake Oswego architect Kathy Kramer and local builder Green Hammer Construction to create two 1,600 square foot houses that are poised to earn 105 LEED points apiece - good for a top 'Platinum' rating and then some.

The roof is a result of studies at the University of South Florida that Weiss found. It's made of zinc-aluminum alloy to reflect radiant energy. And because there are no penetrations of the surface from a chimney or otherwise, it has a very high R-56 thermal value.

There is also a 6,000-gallon rainwater storage tank installed underground. The rainwater is filtered and used for showers as well as flushing toilets. Unless there's a major summer drought, Weiss says they can live almost entirely on rainwater. Hot water come from a ground source heat pump.

The walls are 8 inches thick, providing excellent insulation (an R-32 thermal rating) and preventing what's called "thermal bridging", in which heat or cold is conducted through the wood structure. There are also fiberglass window frames that help keep air out.

The house is so air-tight, in fact, that when it was measured by Earth Advantage, it was the highest ever tested by that organization. Weiss had to have fans installed around the house to discharge air.

Radiant heating is embedded in concrete floors, which are made from 45 percent recycled fly ash, and the wood stairway treads were milled from a fir tree on site. Tall ceilings make the houses' small floor plates seem larger. Weiss cites houses he saw for staff at Yellowstone National Park as inspiration.

Weiss and his family are living in one of the Leapfrog houses, but the other is for sale. And with temperatures today predicted to be in the mid-90s, I can tell you it was also very hot when I visited the Weiss house last week, at least on the outside. But inside you'd have thought it was November.

PSU's $25 million green grant

As numerous outlets have reported today, Portland State University will be given $25 million over the next decade (contingent upon the school generating matching grants) from the James F. and Marion L. Miller Foundation of Portland. The grant is for additional investments in research and teaching about sustainable environmental practices. 

The $25 million grant is by far the largest in PSU's history; the largest previous amount was $8 million. By comparison, the 27,000 student university's entire operating budget last year, according to Bill Graves' Oregonian report, was $346 million.

Graves also was told by PSU provost Roy Koch that the money will be used to support studies and research on sustainable practices in transportation, business, architecture and other areas. 

Thinking about architecture in particular, what might this mean for Portland State? The school only recently attained an accreditation for master's degree programs. If the school is to be a leader in sustainability, as the grant intends, shouldn't they have an accredited undergraduate degree program in architecture?

[Update 9/12: A commenter writes, "NAAB (the accredidation folks) have closed the door on any new undergraduate programs. so PSU and any other schol seeking accreditation for a new professional degree has no choice but to seek the graduate designation."]

Also, there are numerous colleges whose environmental studies departments and/or buildings comprise some ambitious architecture, perhaps most notably architect Will McDonough's Lewis Center at Oberlin College (pictured) and Mahlum Architects' Seminar II building at Evergreen State College. Might Portland State University eventually have a landmark center for environmental studies?

If so, although I often argue for bringing in talented outside firms for big signature landmark projects, there are plenty of local firms that could compete well given their first rate green design credentials: SERA Architects, Opsis Architecture, and of course GBD Architects. But countless firms, from Zimmer Gunsul Frasca to BOORA to Thomas Hacker Architects, know how to make a LEED gold or platinum building these days as well. GBD has already done it for another school tied to PSU: Oregon Health & Science University.

What else might those in the design community like to see done with this $25 million to forward the cause of sustainability in Portland at at PSU in particular? Oh, and one other thought: Apparently this foundation has been in operation since 2002. Where have they been before this? And is the $25 million the end of their donations, or the beginning? James and Marion Miller have both passed away, but one wonders if their foundation might be interested in future benefaction -- like, for example, towards a contemporary art museum?

Poetry from Prose: LEED Platinum row houses by Building Arts Workshop

When they relocated to Portland from California not long ago, husband-wife architects Jeff and Tracy Prose got right to work for an anxious client: themselves.

The pair, working under the firm name Building Arts Workshop, have designed and seen construction completed on a pair of connected row homes in the Burlingame area of Southwest Portland near Lewis & Clark College. (I love the firm's name, by the way, which reminds me of the Sesame Street producers Children's Television Workshop or the seminal 60s group Modern Jazz Quartet, both past faves.) The project is poised to earn a Platinum rating from the US Green Building Council's LEED for Homes program.

Visiting Jeff and Tracy's house a couple weeks ago (once I accounted for a wrong term that took me all the way to Lake Oswego), it was easy to spot the pair of row houses with their blend of wood cladding, masonry, glass, and slanting roofs. 

Or is it more appropriate to call this project a single duplex? In keeping with city code, the two homes share a common wall, but Jeff and Tracy found a way to create better privacy and greenspace. In the front of the property, the two residences share a garage, but behind the garage both units look out onto a shared bamboo-filled courtyard and bioswale that captures rainwater and looks a lot more attractive than your average grass lawn (although less usable for the kids).

Inside, as an Oregonian Homes & Gardens article pointed out, the sustainability factor doesn't prevent a clean, contemporary feel with tons of natural light. The dining area is the heart of the home, anchoring a double-height space onto which the upstairs hallway looks out.

One disclosure: the project was brought to my attention by realtor Bob Zaikoski of Portland Modern, who sold the adjacent row home for Jeff & Tracy and is also a sponsor of this website. But I hope it's obvious that I'm writing about this project because it's good, not because I owe Bob some kind of favor. If anyone thinks this is an egregious break with integrity, please let me know by email.

Not every architect or firm, even the very talented ones, is cut out for developing its own projects. Which is not to say one approach to design is better than the other. However, that Jeff & Tracy did so, and with wonderful results, is something to applaud.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention this in the original post, but this house will also be included in the Build It Green homes tour on Saturday, September 20.

Portlander wins grand prize in Dwell magazine/AIA's "How green are you?" contest

As previously reported on Shelby Wood's PDX Green blog, Ryan Walsh of DRW Design Build in Portland was the grand prize winner in the "How green are you?" contest from Dwell magazine and the American Institute of Architects.

Walsh's circa-1925 bungalow was created over the course of eight years due to financial constraints. Instead of the more traditional process of first defining the aesthetic, then purchasing material to construct it, the house became a collection of various green projects, each utilizing recycled materials in uncommon ways.

The two other finalists also came from the Pacific Northwest: the Gulf Island House by Matthew Woodruff and Clinton Cuddington of Measured Architecture in Vancouver, British Columbia; and the Salvaged Cedar house by Ryan Mankoski, Ninebark Studio & Chad Schneider of ArchiLab Design in Seattle.

"We were especially intrigued with projects that executed beautiful design ideas and were inherently green by concept,” said juror Robert M. Rogers, FAIA, Roger Marvel Architects. “From small ideas for the kitchen, to a way of life, the winners embodied these principles."

Saving the planet for...7 bucks?

Yesterday I got my latest bill from Portland General Electric. As usual, it included a $3.50 charge for clean wind energy, something I signed up for a couple years ago. I've often wondered exactly what that $3.50 buys: my entire electricity, or just a tiny portion?

So I called PGE to get the scoop. It turns out that $3.50 buys the equivalent of 200 kilowatt hours of power. This month I used 298 kWh, so wind power accounted for all but 98 kWh. But the PGE representative I talked to said that in the winter time, my usage is closer to 400 kilowatt hours. In other words, I'm getting almost half of my power from wind. If I were to add another 200-kWh unit for $3.50 per month, I'd easily be getting all my energy for a measly $7 per month.

(I happen to be gating my green power from wind, but any other alternative energy source such as solar or geothermal is of course fine too.)

Granted, I have a smaller residence than some. It's about a 1,000 square foot apartment. But even if you lived in, say, a 4000 square foot house, and were a PGE customer, you could probably get all wind or other green power for under $30 per month.

Because of Bonneville Dam, I believe Oregon also has somewhat cheaper electricity rates than many other states.

Still, for all the endless talk of a world energy crisis, I would have thought getting all my electricity from a green source would have been a lot more expensive. My power bills average $40-$50 per month, so paying $7 extra is about one-sixth or one-seventh of the total cost. Would it really be so ludicrous to imagine every citizen of Portland doing the same? Of course PGE would probably not be able to deliver alternative power at this point to all 500,000 of us in the Rose City or the other half-million in outlying suburbs. Even so, if I can get green electricity for 7 dollars a month, I can't help but feel encouraged that weening our society off fossil fuels is a doable proposition.

Or am I just chasing windmills?

Vertical Farming

An article in today's New York Times spotlights a potential new building type that has already generated discussion in Portland and Seattle: vertical farming.

The article talks about a proposal from a Columbia University professor to build a 30-story tower in Manhattan devoted mostly to hydroponic agriculture and able to generate its own power. Once thought of as a ludicrous idea given the cost compared to regular horizontal farming in the ground, the idea has attracted supporters such as Manhattan borough president Scott Stringer. What if a land parcel near Wall Street downtown or Times Square in midtown put fresh produce a few blocks away? Well, actually such amenities exist now in the form of produce trucked in from actual farms. But with land growing ever more scarce and world populations seemingly adding another billion every few days, it's less of a harebrained scheme than it used to be.

One of the most viable proposals for vertical agriculture is one from Seattle architecture firm Mithun that won top honors at the Cascadia chapter of the Green Building Council's Living Building Challenge held here in April.

Mithun’s Center for Urban Agriculture packs over an acre of farm and forest land into a slice of downtown Seattle. The design for this as-yet unbuilt 23-story vertical farm combines many other sustainable building features, like producing its own energy and collecting and recycling its own water, in an effort to illustrate the potential and increasing value of an urban built environment that functions without drawing on scarce resources and acts in balance with its surroundings.

“As a society, we don’t really look at the true cost of all that we do," Mithun CEO Bert Gregory told AIArchitect magazine recently. "As climate change comes to the forefront, [and] as value is placed upon greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation or elimination of those, then the cost of projects like this will actually be more directly tied to their value,” Gregory says. And therefore, he hopes, it will be a lot more practical. “That’s a watershed moment we’ll face in just a few years.”

I've heard that Portland leaders were energized by the Mithun proposal and would like to make it happen here instead of Seattle. Is this a viable move for west coast cities like Seattle and Portland that still have a lot of nearby farmland? To me it seems more plausible for larger urban areas and metropolises without much available farmland nearby, like a Shanghai or, again, New York. Even so, if Portland were to become the first city to build a vertical farm, it would be a quintessential expression of the sustainable mindset that originates here.

Let His People Go Surfing: Q&A with Mark Edlen

I usually don't post the articles I write for other publications (except in the 'Brian's other writing sidebar at right), but I thought this Q&A with Mark Edlen of Gerding Edlen Development from Metropolis magazine might be of interest. Gerding Edlen is hugely impressive to me, and while I don't always find the individual buildings to be bite-the-back-of-your-hand gorgeous, a develper and architect team that routinely scores with both LEED points and urban placemaking should always earn high marks.

I'll post a few of the questions and answers here, and you can also read the full interview on the Metropolis website.

How did your development company become focused on sustainability early on, in the days before LEED ratings?

We both grew up here, my partner Bob [Gerding] and I. We both have a big love of the outdoors. I’m a big fan of Yvonne Chounard, the founder of Patagonia. The first thing we give any of our employees to read is his book, "Let My People Go Surfing: The Education of a Reluctant Businessman". So we kind of morphed from doing a lot of energy-saving things in the early 1990s to, when the USGBC came around, going toward a broader, more full fledged sustainability with The Natural Step and all that.

How much progress do you think has been made with the average mainstream developer, realtor, or lender in terms of green building and the business case for it?

I think if you’re just building a responsible building or smart at all, basic development practice is such that you ought to at least be doing a [LEED] Silver building. I read about people getting LEED certification and I’m going [cringes], “Oh my God.”

But I also still get plenty of people saying to me, “How much more does it cost?” My sense is that, on a hundred-million-dollar building to go from Silver to Gold, you’re probably talking three quarters of a point to a [percentage] point. To go from Gold to Platinum, you’re probably talking about a couple of points. But then, what’s your payback? And what kind of incentives or tax credits are out there?

When we started doing this stuff ten years ago, it was maybe three percent more cost to get to the equivalent of LEED Gold. But today, because we’re smarter about how we’re doing this, and our architects and engineers and contractors have been doing this with us for ten years, that’s changed.

What advice can you give developers about building green without it costing more?

Whoever is driving the boat has to have their vision, and they need to communicate it to everybody upfront from day one. And they’ve got to put it in their pro-forma from day one. And then they’ve got to bring everybody on the design, engineering, and construction team together and attack those goals as a team.

The US Green Building Council was, for us, a tremendous framework for our projects to work through sustainability. However, ideally in every building we’d try at least one thing that’s new. For example, measures like light shelves and operable windows and dimmable light ballasts got us to about 30 or 35% energy savings. So then we started doing solar, heat recovery systems, and so on, it got us to a Platinum-level building with about 50 to 55% energy savings. But we’ve still got a long way to go to get to buildings that sustain themselves.

In Portland a new streetcar system was key to the success of your firm’s Brewery Blocks development. You’ve also advocated that Los Angeles build a similar system. How essential are they to urban development in the central core of cities?

I’ve come to the conclusion that these developments and these cities are really about creating a framework for social interaction and accidental collisions. It’s one person bumping into another and having the opportunity to talk about their work, their kids’ soccer game, the play they saw last night, or whatever the case may be. Here in the Pearl District, where you’re living and working, you’re always late for meetings because you’re always bumping into somebody. The streetcar’s the same thing. I can out-walk it, but you know what happens when you ride? You bump into folks.

The condo boom has increasingly come to include the designs of famous architects like Richard Meier. But you’ve gone a different route, working with the same Portland firm, GBD Architects, on almost every project and instead focusing on sustainability. Why?

No matter what we build, we want it to be of the highest quality product. But for me, that goes into detail things like making sure how floor systems are built to reduce sound, or how our mechanical systems provide comfort efficiently. There are some buildings you see a year or two after construction is completed and there’s a big sheet over the exterior because they’re fixing some kind of intrusion problem. You won’t ever see that on one of our buildings.

What about the fact that the overwhelming majority of condos built in America over the last several years are too expensive for most all middle class people to afford?

We’re trying to move toward workforce housing, to create product where younger folks can come in and buy. At The Civic here in Portland, about a third of our buyers were first-time buyers. But project-wise, it’s really tough. Your basic structure costs the same whether you’re going to charge a thousand bucks a foot or a hundred bucks a foot. And sometimes the kind of urban places that Baby Boomers want to spend time in can be very different from places where younger people want to spend time. It translates into location and into design. Trying to interpret those factors into a building is really the most important thing you can do.

Your firm has made its name and success building condos, but nationwide that market seems to be slowing. Here in Portland, you’re now building more offices than condos.

The natural inclination for a developer is, “How can I build the least costly product?” But we really learned from the Brewery Blocks experience. We were digging a hole for this five-building project right when 9/11 hit. The office market went way down. But occupancy rates in the office buildings we did were higher than the rest of the city. I think it’s because we were able to highly differentiate our product and create a great place for people to come. Even the most conservative firm now looks at a competitor’s green office space and says, ‘Those guys are out-hiring us. They don’t have the turnover rate we have. Their people seem to be happier and more creative.” Instead of seeing that it costs a buck a foot more, they’re recognizing that they’re going to get ten bucks a foot more out of their people.

Sustainable Industries Magazine Announces Top 10 Green Products

Sustainable Industries magazine (or as I still think of them, the Sustainable Industries Journal) has announced its top 10 green products for 2008. Descriptions are from the magazine (which in full disclosure I also write for).

Compressed Earth Blocks (CEB), produced by Midwest Earth Builders with a CEB machine manufactured by Powell & Sons. This block-building system, typically fed with local clays and soils, creates blocks uniform in size and density that can be "drystacked" to form durable, energy-efficient walls.

EcoTop, manufactured by KlipTech. The first countertop on the market to use both paper and wood fibers certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) as well as rapidly renewable bamboo fibers.

 

Lamberts Channel Glass, manufactured by Glasfrabriks Lamberts. (Pictured above installed at the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn.) Self-supporting columns made of 40% post-consumer recycled glass that can be used to make exterior or interior walls. The channel glass is manufactured in a low-polluting oxygen-fired furnaces.

Masa Cabinet Hardware, manufactured by Eleek. Cabinet hardware made of 100-percent post-consumer recycled aluminum sourced from Portland's Rebuilding Center.

MetroPaint, Metro. An interior and exterior paint made from 100 percent post-consumer recycled interior and exterior latex paint collected from Portland's hazardous waste centers and some retail locations.

Resource Monitor, manufactured by Agilewaves. Monitor collects data from electric, water and gas lines and sends it to a password-protected Web page where building occupants can find detailed information about the cost of a building's consumption in both dollars and carbon weight. Agilewaves bests similar products on the market by aiming to prove the benefits of modern technologies such solar photovoltaics and green roofs.

Solar Tracking Skylight, manufactured by Solar Tracking Skylights Inc. The Solar Tracking Skylight is a completely self-contained, self-managed skylight with mirrors. Unlike typical skylights, which only provide light to occupants when the sun crosses its opening, Solar Tracking Skylight's mirrors provide coverage throughout the entire day.

Straw Wall, manufactured by Green Design Systems. Straw Walls are infill panels similar to straw bale wall systems made of just three materials: rice straw and hulls (an agricultural crop waste), wood framing (certified by the Forest Stewardship Council) and steel mesh (made of 100 percent recycled metal).

Thermastrand Radiant Barrier Sheathing, manufactured by Ainsworth Engineered. Thermastrand is the industry's first radiant barrier foil that is adhered directly to oriented-strand board (OSB) during the manufacturing process. The OSB is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.

Salvaged Hardwood Tables, made by Urban Hardwoods. Over the past 10 years, Urban Hardwoods has salvaged about 3,000 trees from Seattle homeowners and turned the wood into tables and other furniture. The company has gone to great lengths to reduce waste and resources in its drying and milling process.

Does anyone reading this have any experience using any of these products? Or what might be some green products and materials not on this list that people would like to recommend?

“Platinum Will Be a Yawner”, And Other Notes from Friday’s Green Building Forum

Last Friday at the Gerding Theater I attended the panel discussion about green building in Portland moderated by Metropolis editor Susan Szanasy as part of PNCA’s “Idea Studios”. My notes aren’t comprehensive, but hint at the 90-minute long conversation.

The panel was first asked to put Portland in the national context when it comes to green building. “Portland is definitely out near the front if not in the front,” Scott Lewis of Brightworks said. “I think there’s a danger of resting on our laurels. But I get kids applying for jobs because they want to move to Portland, because they think it’s the greenest city in the country.”

Greg Bob Baldwin of Zimmer Gunsul Frasca added, “We’re in a place where it’s relatively easy to do well. If there’s something that troubles me…we don’t necessarily put the pieces together. It’s building by building.”

Mark Edlen, head of Gerding Edlen Development, said, “Green building is in our DNA more than other cities….But pretty soon, getting to LEED Platinum will be a yawner. We need to get to net-zero and regenerative buildings.”

Susan Anderson, head of the city’s Office of Sustainable Development, noted that greenhouse gas emissions are down 14% in Portland since 1990 while the national average is up 16%. “The challenge is we need to reduce emissions by 80%,” she said. Anderson also added that we should retrofit and weatherize every building in the city within 10 years, pointing to a program in Berkeley, California where banks and the city sell bonds to provide loans for retrofitting.

Randy Gragg, editor of local home magazine Portland Spaces, pointed out there’s a difference between strategic and tactical. We have a long history of public-private partnerships, and a comprehensive planning tradition, but the last few years we’ve been more tactical than strategic with ill-advised affairs like the Burnside couplet. Gragg also cited Lawrence Halprin’s Keller Fountain as the beginning of the downtown rebirth, acting as a metaphor for the return of the watershed.

Lest we pat ourselves on the collective back here in Portland, though, Scott Lewis had this reminder: “If we get every building to LEED platinum we’re still going off the cliff.” He cited a city in Abu Dhabi intended as an entirely net-zero metropolis, and asked, “How fast can our region run on 100% renewable power?”

Mark Edlen also connected worldwide food shortage and poverty to green building. “Until people in Africa can stop worrying about feeding their kids, they’re not going to worry about solar energy.” But he also called sustainability, “the biggest grassroots movement ever.”

Oh, and most importantly of all given the morning hour at which Friday’s panel was held: The event included lots of tasty, highly fattening donuts and some very respectable Illy coffee. I hope some of the rest of you were able to access the couple of pastries I didn’t scarf down.

Portland and the COTE Top 10 Green List

A couple weeks ago the American Institute of Architects' Committee on the Environment released its annual Top Ten Green Projects list.

As described by the AIA, the program "celebrates projects that are the result of a thoroughly integrated approach to architecture, natural systems and technology. They make a positive contribution to their communities, improve comfort for building occupants and reduce environmental impacts through strategies such as reuse of existing structures, connection to transit systems, low-impact and regenerative site development, energy and water conservation, use of sustainable or renewable construction materials, and design that improves indoor air quality."

Considering that Portland has often been called the nation's greenest city, and at various times we've had the most LEED-rated projects in the nation, you'd think we'd be all over this list, either the new one or past lists of the top 10 green projects. Actually, though, that's not the case at all.

This year's AIA/COTE Top 10 honors projects in New York, Pennsylvania, Boston, Seattle, Wisconsin and elsewhere.  But there's not one project from Portland. And if you look back at past years of COTE lists, Portland has hardly any presence at all.

Last year, the Gerding Theater at the Armory by GBD Architects (pictured above) received an Honorable Mention, but still failed to crack the 2007 Top 10 list despite being one of the nation's first ever LEED Platinum rated historic renovations. A Eugene project with an assist from a Portland firm was on the list, the Morse US Courthouse, but legendary architect Thom Mayne is really the auteur of that project, not DLR Group.

In 2006, a Portland project indeed made the list, the Lloyd Crossing Sustainable Design Plan, but it wasn't a work of architecture and it wasn't from a Portland firm (the designer was Mithun of Seattle). 2004 had no Portland firms or projects on the list, nor did 2003. In 2002 the modest but very sustainable Bank of Astoria in Manzanita by Oregon coast architect Tom Bender made the list, but that's still not Portland. The awards began in 1997, but if you go all the way back to the beginning, there is still no accolade for local firm or project.

Meanwhile, our northern neighbors in Seattle are all over the COTE Top 10 list almost every time. This year's list includes the Discovery Center at South Lake Union in Seattle by local firm Miller/Hull Partnership, as well as the Pocono Environmental Education Center by Seattle firm Bohlin Cywinski Jackson. Miller/Hull, Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, Mahlum Architects and Mithun, all from the home of the NFL's Sea-turkeys, each have multiple AIA/COTE Top 10 finishes: Mithun for two different REI stores and the Puget Sound Environmental Learning Center, Miller Hull for this year's Lake Union project as well as past list-makers the Bainbridge Island City Hall and Pierce County Environmental Services, and even Mahlum has both Ben Franklin Elementary in Kirkland and and a building at Evergreen State College in Olympia.

So here's the question: Does the history of the COTE top 10 show that Portland is over-rated as a green building city, that it's under-recognized, both or neither? I think of landmark sustainable projects here like GBD's Center For Health and Healing at OHSU, a LEED Platinum rated design that's a whopping 50% more energy efficient than code, which is stunning for such a big building. Or the Ecotrust Natural Capital Center in the Pearl. Or the net-zero energy Rose House by SERA Architects. Or the Brewery Blocks. They're all supposed to be leading-edge sustainable projects. Are they not? Or if they are, why aren't they on the list?

Then again, maybe it's just the nature of awards and lists. I mean, other than maybe this year and a few other exceptions, the Academy Awards almost never pick the right film for Best Picture. Rocky over Taxi Driver? Oliver over 2001: A Space Odyssey? Crash over...anything? Even Kevin Costner has a Best Director Oscar and neither Alfred Hitchcock nor Orson Welles ever got one. 'Nuff said.

Even so, I'm curious whether people think COTE ignores Portland, or whether we're not as special as we think.

A Super-Green House With...Dirt Floors? (Updated)

Last Friday The Oregonian's Gail Kinsey Hill reported on a house in Portland being designed and built by two brothers, Dustin and Garrett Moon, that will achieve a level of green that even substantially bests the US Green Building Council's LEED ratings. It will be an almost entirely self-sufficient, truly sustainable home. And as Hill's report indicated, these aren't top local architects doing this project, but a couple of young guys (22 and 30) heretofore unknown in the architecture/building community.

[In the image above, which I took from the Oregonian article, the numbers denote several individual features: (1) green roof, (2) rain capture system, (3) translucent movable roof, (4) a movable wall, (5) insulating concrete walls, (6) photovoltaic modules, and (7) a shop and garden.]

The house used as its guide the Cascadia USGBC chapter's Living Building Challenge, which favors simple performance measurements over the point system of LEED. Their project may be the first in the country to meet these more stringent standards.

Historic preservation fans may cringe at the fact that Dustin and Garrett are tearing down an old Southeast Portland home to build this new version. But as they explained in the article, the solar orientation was all wrong. This will be a very glassy home wrapped around a courtyard. It'll also have composting toilets and even a movable roof and interior walls. (The photo at left is by Stephanie Yao of the Oregonian.)

One of the admirable aspects of the project is that the brothers are building the house themselves as well, using lots of recycled supplies from places like The Rebuilding Center. The whole thing will only cost them about $200,000.

However, one thing that made me scratch my head was that Dustin and Garrett's cost-saving measure to have bedrooms with dirt floors.

Sustainable design and construction has always had this aspect to it. I think of the cob benches I see at various co-op groceries, bike shops and the occasional cafe around town. Or the rammed-earth projects one reads about in various rural locales. You don't get much more basic and sustainable than using the ground beneath our feet for architectural purposes.

Still, I keep saying to myself, "Dirt floors?" When I think of those few conservatives out there who are skeptical about green building, cob benches and dirt floors are to me precisely the kind of stuff they'll ridicule.

I absolutely love Dustin and Garrett's chutzpah making a do-it-yourself project into one of the nation's most sustainable homes, all on a tiny budget and lots of their own sweat. Yet if you're spending $200,000 on your future house, which is cheap by most standards but still a huge amount of money, couldn't you just spend the extra few hundred dollars for some simple flooring? If they want to stay green, there are countless fine options in bamboo, true linoleum, cork, etc.

Imagine their mom staying there and saying, "You boys are grown men and you're still tracking dirt all over the house. Wipe your feet!" And they of course retort, "But mom, it's our floors!" Maybe it's just the neat freak in me, but I'm with mom on this one.

UPDATE 4-18-08: As many have already read in the comments to this post, it's not really dirt floors that will be in the Moons' house. Rather, it's an earthenware flooring that is more akin to hardened clay. Regardless, I was being at least partially tongue-in-cheek when I harped as much as I did about these guys' floors. I just am not fond of the cob and rammed-earth aesthetic, although I certainly can't fault the function and sustainability of these age-old practices. As one commenter said, earthenware floors are a lot less weird when you think about it than cheap synthetic manufactured linoleum leaking chemicals into the air of our homes. And above the floor in the Moons' house is an aesthetic (and a function) I do love: lots of glass. So whether it's dirt or earthenware beneath their feet, nice going fellas!

Green Investment Grants and a Resurrected One Waterfront Place

Earlier this week the City of Portland's Office of Sustainable Development and the Energy Trust of Oregon announced $425,000 in grants to several sustainable developments as part of its Green Investment Fund.

The projects include Mercy Corps' global headquarters being built in Old Town, with a design from Thomas Hacker Architects; 14th & Everett, the old Meier & Frank warehouse in the Pearl District being renovated by Gerding Edlen Development from a GBD Architects design; Park Avenue West, the Tom Moyer-developed and TVA Architects-designed condo tower just west of Pioneer Courthouse Square; an addition an aquatics center in east Portland that will make innovative re-use of water; Simpsons Commons, an affordable housing project; 12W, a new mixed-use tower; and One Waterfront Place, developer Jim Winkler's BOORA Architects-designed office building.

I was especially surprised to see One Waterfront Place on the list, because this project was planned several years ago and has been languishing in search of an anchor tenant seemingly named Godot. It's been so long, in fact, that one of the primary architects at BOORA with whom the project was associated, the exceptionally talented Frenchman monsieur Eric Cugnart, has been gone from the firm for a few years. (He's now at Mulvanny G2.)

Originally, though, One Waterfront was supposed to rise near the Broadway Bridge around the same time another office project, One Main Place by GBD Architects, was set to be built at the west end of the Hawthorne Bridge. One Main also languished unbuilt in a slow office market for a few years, and it's now under construction. So perhaps it's fitting they come up together again. One Waterfront is also supposed to have a pedestrian bridge connecting the Willamette Greenway to the Pearl, so that will also be an interesting extra. When completed in 2010 (which I'll believe when I see), the building is poised to be the first Platinum LEED-rated speculative office building. That would have been even more impressive a few years ago when it was originally planned. Still, you've got to admire Winkler's stick-to-it-iveness.

One Waterfront actually received 27% of the total GIF funds, which will be directed toward an innovative storm water system that will disconnect the building from the city's storm water system by filtering and percolating all site storm water into the aquifer. As it says on BOORA's website, "The project's design team and the grantmaking entities believe that disconnecting the entire 3.27-acre brownfield site from the city’s storm water system represents a solution to on-site stormwater management for brownfield sites that can be replicated in other development projects. If widely adopted, this innovative stormwater management system has the potential to curtail future investments in CSO (combined sewerage overflow) mitigation measures, which have become a large cost to municipalities throughout the country, including Portland."

Meanwhile, the migration of offices from downtown to the Pearl continues. When you've worked in an office space with lots of natural light and ventilation, along with all the other amenities of green, it's pretty dreary to be anywhere else. What will become of the countless old office buildings downtown? Can we rebuild them green in a way that favorably compares with the new offices north of Burnside?

One other thought, though: Is it right that these projects, many of which seem to come from the city's biggest developers, are the ones getting a lot of the public investment from the GIF? I'm not saying it's wrong. These guys in the private sector, particularly Gerding Edlen and GBD, are leading the way in this field. Maybe I'm imagining some more romantically ultra-sustainable little projects out there that either don't exist or didn't apply for GIF funding.

Green Building's Resident Curmudgeon

I got to know Metropolis magazine columnist Philip Nobel last November while we were on a press trip for a museum opening, the Ullens Center in Beijing. I found him to be a nice guy, if quite the chain smoker. We and a couple other journalists had fun scurrying away by taxi from a gala dinner with champagne and caviar held in a building with no heat (that's China in a nutshell). But in his column Philip has somewhat of a curmudgeonly reputation.

That's definitely true when it comes to green building. "And not only because it's boring," Philip writes in this month's column. "As saving the Earth has become the cause of all causes, I thought this might just be my usual knee-jerk recoiling from things earnest and popular. Now I know it's a deeply principled stand based on the defense of public manners." He continues:

"When one does something good, does one then crow about it, seeking gain? That would be the opposite of grace. But that is exactly what we see in page after page of project after project, each claiming to be LEEDier than thou. Here, planet, I've done you this kindness. Look everyone, I'm saving the planet!"

"Clearly there's a place for a specialized literature, a quiet little spot on the journalistic margins where green architects and clients can trade best practices and grow the field. It's the right thing to do. But that doesn't mean we need to hear about it."

Philip is really just 'taking the piss', as the English say, crowing in a provocative way that makes entertaining copy. I hesitate to dive into defending green building for fear of seeming too earnest and popular. And because green building doesn't really need defending from Philip.

Still, even if he's just joking, it's too bad if Philip or others who grow weary of green building talk think it's only about saving the planet.

Let's suppose for a moment that they discovered global warming wasn't happening after all, or that there was some infinitely plentiful new energy source that made efficiency and alternatives to fossel fuels less urgent. Even then, I'd take the chance to live or work in a green building in a heartbeat, because they're better places to be. Spend a day working in front of a window, then the next in an artificially lit basement. When were you most productive? Happy?

Philip is right, though, that green buidling needs to develop an identity based more on altruism and back-patting for meeting LEED strictures. How can we capture people's imagination with green buildings without just rattling off the points they score for recycling or low-flow showerheads?

Saltzman Announces New City Green Building Standard

Tonight at PDX Lounge, the Portland showcase at the USGBC's Greenbuild Conference, Commissioner Dan Saltzman announced a new incentive and fee program for all new buildings based on their carbon footprint and energy usage profile.

The standard is still just in the talking stage - it hasn't been approved. But it seems very likely to pass in this city council.

As I understand it, the standard would break down like this: If your building is 45% more efficient than energy code stipulations, you'll actually get a rebate check from the city. If your project is 30% better, there'll be no rebate, but also no fee. If your building is less than 30% more efficient than code, you'll be charged what's called a "carbon fee".

As a point of reference, the OHSU Center for Health & Healing by GBD Architects is about 50% more efficient than code, and it attained a 'Platinum' LEED rating from the US Green Building Council. So even if they wouldn't have to attain high LEED ratings, the City is more or less saying that every building built in Portland will need to either meet that range of greenness (the only way to get those kind of efficiencies) or pay the cost in a very literal sense.

This would be the first carbon fee issued by an American city for new buildings.

I'm sure architects and green building enthusiasts would be quite jazzed about this plan. But there also is probably going to be some fear and trepidation. What do the rest of you think?

Gearing Up For Greenbuild

Hello frequent flyer miles.

Less than 36 hours after touching down at PDX airport on Sunday night from a Beijing trip, I again embarked for the Friendly Skies to attend this year's Greenbuild conference here in Chicago. As I write this, I'm looking out from my hotel at Michigan Avenue and downtown Chicago, including two buildings I particularly love: the twin 'corn cob' buildings (officially known as Marina City, and pictured here), by architect Bertrand Goldberg (also seen on a Wilco album cover).

It was funny on the flight to Chicago this morning, because it seemed like half the plane was filled with people attending Greenbuild. Even Mayor Tom Potter was aboard - he'll be speaking at the PDX Lounge opening tonight. And say what you will about our self-described "irrelevant" head Portland honcho, but you've got to love any mayor of a major American city who flies in economy class. I also ran into principals from BOORA Architects, Opsis Architecture, and several others.

For those of you who don't know, Greenbuild is presented by the US Green Building Council, the people who issue the LEED ratings for green buildings. This is my third time around at the conference, after catching previous editions in Austin and Portland. I refused to go the year it was in Atlanta (not a fan of sprawl or the red-state South), and reluctantly missed last year's shindig in Denver. It's fun to be here in Chicago, though. And let me tell you: the Windy City is much prettier than Beijing.

This week in addition to posting here when I can, I will also be a guest blogger for BetterBricks.com, one of this blog's sponsors. I'll focus more on the intricacies of educational sessions I and the other BB people attend on their site, and use my own blog for a looser, more anecdotal perspective.

Speaking of which, we're all feeling a little star struck at this year's Greenbuild because the keynote speaker is not an architect or business leader, but one William Jefferson Clinton, the last legitimately elected president of the USA and a personal hero (for his politics, not the personal stuff that got him erroneously impeached). Maybe if I hang out at McDonald's after the address, I might get a personal audience with Bill over a couple Egg McMuffins.

Oh, and not that this has to do with architecture, but in this land of Big Ten football, I am very proudly prancing around in my Oregon Ducks stocking cap. It's needed, too. It's quite cold here and, appropriately given the city's nickname, very windy.

The Green Skyline

On Wednesday the Cascadia region chapter of the US Green Building Council will be hosting a tour of five buildings in Portland with exemplary sustainable credentials. Three are new projects and two are green re-habs.

The first rehab project, the 200 Market Street building (near Keller Auditorium), was the first multi-tenant building in the United States to earn LEED-EB ("Existing Buildings) certification. I've never written about this building before, but it's in its way a distinctive downtown piece of architecture. According to the Green Skyline tour's website, it's been dubbed "black beauty", for its dark skin of exterior metal and shaded glass. Like it or not, the GBD Architects designed building is a real monolith. I'm not so crazy about it just because of the proportions - it's a Portland stump. But the utter blackness of the building does indeed have a certain appeal.

The other re-hab project on the tour, the Lovejoy-Opsis building at NW 17th and Lovejoy, is a more than 80-year-old structure. I visited Opsis Architecture's offices there a couple years ago and they looked fabulous: lots of wood everywhere, but natural light everywhere. This project received a 'Gold' LEED rating, and I like the fact that they have that kind of sustainability factor but also can create very handsome modern buildings (the early 20th Century place they occupy not withstanding).

In addition to the Glumac offices by Emmons Architects, mentioned in a recent post, there is the LEED 'Platinum' rated OHSU Center for Health And Healing (designed by GBD Architects) and Stephen Epler Hall at Portland State University, designed by Mithun of Seattle, which received a 'Silver' rating. As I've said many times, when it was on the drawing board, I was less excited about the OHSU building than the nearby South Waterfront towers by Peter Busby going in about the same time. Now that they're built I definitely prefer the OHSU building. It's also arguably the greenest piece of architecture, at least on this scale, ever built in Oregon.

'Green Skyline' is a nice, catchy name for this tour, but ironically, this one of the only movements in the history of architecture that isn't rooted in primarily in aesthetics. What does it mean to have a green skyline? When I think of the word skyline, I think of the view we have of a city's major downtown tall buildings from a distance. That's an act of aesthetic observation. Unfortunately, the building on the tour I would actually consider part of a green skyline is the OHSU Center.

But really the purpose of this tour is to go check out projects and meet the people who made them happen, in large part from a practical perspective. That's just as important as the look of the skyline - even more so, arguably. But I'd still like to know what a green skyline in Portland, or elsewhere, might look like.