This article raises an interesting point about the LEED certification system. Should developers acquire certification or just stick to the guidelines as set out by LEED? Developers are always on the lookout for saving dollars whether its in the short term or the long term so it makes sense to apply technology that will reduce energy consumption over a project's lifespan. At the end of the day
accreditation is a "nice have," but why pay the extra price for the branding?
From betterbricks.com:
To LEED™ or Not to LEED™?
by Brian Libby
This Spring, one of the greenest building projects in Pacific Northwest history opened its doors for the first time. Since ground was first broken, the Paul L. Boley Law Library at Lewis & Clark College in Portland, a $15 million, 40,000-square-foot rehabilitation and expansion, has employed an entire spectrum of sustainable building practices, from recycling of construction waste to natural ventilation systems and an eco roof. The Boley Library is unquestionably green enough to earn certification through the US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (
LEED™) program. Soderstrom Architects, the project’s designers, say they believe the library would probably have achieved a ‘Silver’ rating. Ultimately, though, Lewis & Clark decided not to apply. Why the college decided against seeking LEED™ certification, and how they have addressed ensuing sustainable building projects on campus, says a lot about LEED™ and sustainable building.
In the less than four years since it was first introduced as a pilot program in 1998, the LEED™ rating system has helped transform sustainable design and construction. What was once a tiny and largely insignificant niche market driven largely by altruism has rapidly become the new paradigm for the future of mainstream building, driven by long-term economic vision as much as a desire to save the planet.
Although the first LEED™-certified buildings only began to appear in 2000, already nearly 300 projects have indicated their interest in pursuing LEED™ certification, with total square footage at 6 percent of all new construction nationwide. “It’s unbelievable,” says Ralph DiNola, Senior Design Consultant for Portland General Electric’s Green Building Services division. “When you look at what’s happening nationally, it’s clear that green building is here to stay.”
Here in the Northwest, the first building to receive LEED™ certification came just last year, with Portland’s Viridian Place project, the headquarters for Neil Kelley remodelers, receiving Certification under the new LEED™ 2.0 program. Soon after came the Ecotrust building, also in Portland, a historic renovation that earned a Gold rating, only the second in the nation. In February the Vancouver Island Technology Park in Victoria also earned Gold. Numerous other LEED™ buildings are on the way.
At the same time, however, there is a collection of buildings in the Northwest that, while boasting numerous sustainable design elements, did not follow the US Green Building Council’s process for LEED™ certification. With it becoming more and more of a high-profile mark of building prestige, why not go for LEED™?
“I think that there is an opportunity to build green buildings outside of the LEED™ rating system,” says DiNola. “I would argue that it’s not necessarily a perfect fit for every person who wants to build a green building.”
The primary obstacle facing green projects that want a LEED™ rating is the cost associated with the certification process. While the fee to apply for a rating is only a few hundred dollars, meeting the stringent, extensive and explicit requirements necessary for achieving a LEED™ rating requires two main soft costs: energy modeling and commissioning, as well as extensive documentation.
Energy modeling can be based on either state energy code stipulations or on standards established by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). LEED™ requires that new buildings be at least 20% above ASHRAE standards.
“The issue for developers is that they may have to pay a consultant to model it two ways,” says Greg Acker, an architect for the City of Portland. “There may be some additional costs associated with it, and that’s a stumbling block for some people.”
Commissioning consists of having an independent contractor review the mechanical system, lighting and plumbing to make sure all the systems are specified as designed and working properly. Because it’s becoming standard procedure, commissioning is unlikely to trip up larger commercial projects. LEED™ does require third-party verification for all projects.
A third stumbling block for many a potential LEED™ candidate is documentation. “Some of the binders that are put together for good-sized LEED™ projects can be three inches thick,” says Acker, “with paperwork and paper trails of construction waste recycling and where all the low-toxic materials came from, and the chain of custody for certified wood. There’s a lot of stuff, and that discourages some people.”
According to Michael Sestrick, Facilities Planner for Lewis & Clark College, it was a combination of all the above that discouraged the institution from following through with a LEED™ application. “When we started with the LEED™ process,” he recalls, “we said to ourselves, “This is a really good way to organize our thinking about sustainable architecture. However, it costs money to get certification and we’re not sure that that’s a price we’re willing to pay.’ It’s just one more thing that you have to do.”
Another acclaimed green project to abstain from LEED certification was the Manzanita branch of the Bank of Astoria, along Oregon’s northern coast. Although the project has been listed by the American Institute of Architects as one of 2002’s top ten sustainable projects in the world designed by an American firm, architect Tom Bender says, “Bank of Astoria was so small a project that LEED™ certification would have cost more than I got for design. It makes sense for bigger projects and certain institutional frameworks, but for us the cost was just too much.”
Costs may not be the only shortcoming to the LEED™ system. Sestrick says Lewis & Clark bristled at the notion that they were not eligible for certain points on the LEED™ scorecard. “For example you get a point for developing a brownfield site, but we don’t have that option. We’re not going to go out like a developer and find a brownfield site. We are were we are, so now all of a sudden there’s a point on this absolute scale that we can’t get. It’s only one point in the whole deal, but philosophically it’s a little harder to come to grips with.”
The Boley Library would have also lost out on a rating point by not being reachable by two separate bus lines (only one line serves the college). Sestrick also believes LEED™ is geared toward new construction, which hampers the chance to rate high with rehabbed buildings like the library: “When you’re doing renovations there’s a whole slough of other points that you can’t get because it’s not geared toward that.”
However, since completing the Boley Library, Lewis & Clark College has embarked on number of other building projects, all of which will apply for formal LEED™ rating. “As a community, our feelings about sustainable development have changed significantly in the five years since we started,” Sestrick says. “People are more accepting of the idea that it costs money to do certification, but maybe that’s okay. We want to set an example to our students, our faculty, and other interested members of the Lewis & Clark community. I’m 100 percent behind the
USGBC in their efforts to raise the bar for sustainable development. Like any rating systems, it could always stand improvement. But I think they’re trying to do that.”
It is becoming increasingly evident to many developers and property managers that a green building has growing market advantages. As a result having an official, or market recognized third party certification, such as LEED™, has significant marketing value—something a college may be less concerned about.
The whole issue of whether to employ LEED™ may change over time. “It’s an important framework for sustainability, but I think in five to ten years we’ll have seen a complete market transformation,” says Acker. “We’ll start to make these procedures and products and ideas more and more mainstream. That’s the goal of LEED™.”
Prev
Linear Mode
