Trim Tab v.2 - Spring 2009 by Michael Berrisford

CASCADIA’S MAGAZINE FOR TRANSFORMATIVE PEOPLE + DESIGN

TRANSFORMATIONAL THOUGHT:

02 QUARTER 2009

Density Sustainability A Radical Perspective TRANSFORMATIONAL DESIGN:

Miller | Hull’s

Discovery Center at South Lake Union TRANSFORMATIONAL PEOPLE:

Thomas Crum A Coach for the Mind, Heart and Spirit ALSO:

LEADERSHIP: Scarce Resource or Vast Reservoir?

trim tab

issu e 002 cascadi agb c .org

E d i to r i n Chi e f

E xec u ti ve Ed i tor

Jason F. McLennan Jason@cascadiagbc.org

David R. Macaulay dmacaulay@kc.rr.com

M an ag i ng Ed i tor

Jenny Seifert jenny@cascadiagcb.org

P r o d ucti on Chi e f

Bob Potter bob@cascadiagbc.org

C r eati v e Di re ctor

Erin Gehle ering@softfirmstudios.net

A dv er t i si ng Sarah

Costello sarah@cascadiagbc.org

C o n t r i bu tors

Kira Gould, Bill Walsh, Paul Werder

TRANSFORMATIONAL DESIGN:

Departments 05 TRANSFORMATIONAL DESIGN:

For editorial inquiries or freelance submissions, contact Jenny Seifert at jenny@cascadiagbc.org

South Lake Union Discovery Center: Here Today, A Green Tomorrow by David R. Macaulay

For photography submissions, contact Bob Potter at bob@cascadiagbc.org For advertising, contact Sarah Costello at sarah@cascadiagbc.org Back issues or reprints: Contact info@cascadiagbc.org

A design for portability, adaptability and sustainability

Second Quarter 2009

Thomas Crum: A Coach for the Mind, Heart and Spirit by Jenny S eifert

sp r i n g 20 0 9 , Issu e 2

Trim Tab is a quarterly publication of the Cascadia Region Green Building Council, a nonprofit, taxexempt organization. Office locations: 721 NW 9th Ave Suite 280, Portland, OR 97209; 410 Occidental Ave South, Seattle, WA 98105; 1100-111 Dunsmuir Street, Vancouver, BC V6B 6A3.

TRANSFORMATIONAL PEOPLE:

A conversation with a conflict resolution and stress management expert…and John Denver’s former bodyguard

Column:

Toxic Assets by Bill Wals h

Investing in green labels is fueling ecological collapse

contents second Quarter 2 0 0 9

13 26

TRANSFORMATIONAL PEOPLE:

Moving Upstream TRANSFORMATIONAL THOUGHT:

Features 26

TRANSFORMATIONAL thought:

Density and Sustainability—A Radical Perspective b y Jason F. M c Lennan

Challenging the wisdom of exaggerated height and density in urban structures

LEADERSHIP:

Nuts & Bolts 35

Moving Upstream:

Product Spotlight:

Book Review:

Scarce Resource or Vast Reservoir? b y Paul Werder

How passion and the power of the individual can make transformative change

trim tab

Progress in the Bioregion

Leap, Think, Amia, Siento – Seating

Integrated Design: Mithun by David R. M acaulay, reviewed by Kira Gould

Event Calendar

Second Quarter 2009

story by David R. Macaulay

A modular, movable “pavilion in the park” sets the sustainable tone for a re-emerging Seattle lakefront neighborhood

South Lake Union Discovery Center: Here Today, A Green Tomorrow

ON THE MOVE: Once its mission is complete, the sales/community center will be completely disassembled and relocated to another, nearby site in 20- by 60-foot sections. trim tab

Portability. Reassembly. Adaptive reuse.

to downtown Seattle, is filled with unique architecture of the working 1920s: warehouses built for manufacturing, storage and service. Buildings typically feature post and beam construction, with excellent examples of terra cotta and ornate brick patterns. Today, within sight of the lakefront, the area is also home to research centers, colleges, urban lofts and parks.

A temporary, demountable building may represent the highest form of sustainability. A place for people that sits lightly on the land and serves as a showcase for sustainable design – those objectives and more were achieved in Seattle’s South Lake Union Discovery Center.

Located at the busy corner of Westlake and Denny, the Discovery Center serves as both a community space and sales center. In the middle of the building, potential buyers can see mockups of the newest residential units while visitors tour exhibits of the neighborhood’s history and visualize plans for its ultimate buildout. As a benefit to residents, the center also becomes a place for receptions, private meetings and community events. The center rests on the eastern edge of a full-block urban park, a gift to the City of Seattle for the next 10 years until the site is fully developed, featuring a soccer field and basketball court.

Completed in March 2005, this modular, 11,100-squarefoot “pavilion in the park” was designed to be separated, moved, reassembled and reused in future locations. Thanks to its innovative design and construction, this project was honored as an AIA Committee on the Environment Top Ten Green Project for 2008, as well as 2007 winner of the Lifecycle Building Challenge, a competition that recognizes high-performance buildings designed to facilitate adaptability and materials reuse. The SLU Discovery Center has quickly become the centerpiece of a 60-acre, mixed-use redevelopment led by Vulcan, Inc. to transform South Lake Union into a sustainable community. This urban neighborhood, adjacent

THE PARADIGM, SHIFTED

Vulcan selected Seattle’s Miller|Hull Partnership, LLP to lead the design of this pavilion. Since establishing the practice in 1977, principals David Miller and Robert Hull have gained a reputation for public architecture: community centers, city halls, branch libraries, and private schools. “But equal to that, we’ve tried to make all of our buildings environmentally responsible,” says Miller. “It’s been

SUSTAINABLE CENTER: The SLU Discovery Center is located in the midst of an emerging neighborhood of residential communities, offices, and nearby private schools. © Lara Swimmer

Second Quarter 2009

“I’m most proud of the way the Discovery Center responds to its program. For us, the program should represent the key issues you extract from the client’s aspirations and unique requirements, and the site ecology that exists. What can you learn from those to develop a strong concept? Sometimes it’s a huge struggle, and we don’t get the big breakthrough…but on this one, we were able to do that.” — DAVID MILLER, Principal and Lead Designer, The Miller|Hull Partnership

part of our DNA.” Among their most notable projects are the Seattle Center Fisher Pavilion and the Conibear Shellhouse Renovation & Addition (rowing facility) at the University of Washington. With Miller|Hull and the rest of the SLU project team in place by 2004, the client made clear their plans for the new pavilion: the building would need to be moved eventually to a nearby site and resume its primary role as a sales, information and community space. Sales centers for residential developments like this typically have very short lifespans, since they disappear after construction is complete and the units sold. The modular nature of the project, therefore, would allow it to serve for a much longer period of time. The idea of a portable building struck Miller as a “very unusual request from an owner”: “In fact, in my 35 years of practice, this was the first time I’d ever been asked to design a building that could be moved to another site. Often, we think we can design a building that could be expanded, taken apart and

reconfigured – but never totally disconnected from its site and moved elsewhere and reassembled. So that was a great challenge. Immediately, we knew that we had something we could build a conceptual idea around that would be unique, while making a point about how a building typically thought of as temporary…with a five-year lifespan…could be extended out to become a 50- or 75-year building.” A MODULAR SOLUTION

Miller and his team explored a series of alternatives, starting with the idea of trailerable units that could be ganged together. The general contractor, GLY Construction of Bellevue, offered vital input early in the process. Together, they realized the constraints of the trailer module “was holding us back,” he notes, “so we started looking at this idea of a modular structure that could be taken apart in sections.” Finally, they arrived at a solution. Relying on prefab pattern language and a 45-by-110-foot maximum module spec from a local building mover, the design team devised a modular system of four structural bays each formed by a hoop of custom steel components.

Materials with Recycled Content • All structural steel utilizes a minimum of 90 percent recycled steel content • High fly-ash content concrete was used with the highest reasonable fly-ash ratio (50 percent at footings and piers, 30 percent at exposed slabs) • Recycled concrete rubble (500 cubic yards) was used as the sub-grade base at the parking area • Trex® decking was used at all exterior decking areas • Other finish materials with recycled content include the carpeting, GWB, Marmoleum® flooring, and the Armstrong® ceiling tile Environmentally-Responsible Materials • OSB sheathing and LSL blocking was utilized throughout the project as the roof sheathing system • OSB panels were used at the exhibit and display kiosks • Glued-laminated wood purlins were used for the roof structure

trim tab

[RIGHT] TEMPORARY HOME: Today at the corner of Westlake and Denny, the Center sits light on the land – atop short concrete piers, ensuring that the sloping terrain and vegetation underneath are not disturbed. [FAR RIGHT] EXHIBIT SPACE: Inviting and light-filled, the Discovery Center draws visitors to displays of the area’s past and a model of plans for the future of South Lake Union. Interior materials feature more than 80 percent recycled content within a raw, industrial, high-tech envelope.

©Lara Swimmer

Vulcan had a second major request for the building as well: that its design clearly express Pacific Northwest Regionalism. While Miller|Hull’s previous body of work didn’t include many multi-family residential or large office building projects, the firm was quite familiar with this style; in fact, Miller was just starting to write his book, Toward a New Regionalism: Environmental Architecture in the Pacific Northwest (University of Washington Press, 2005) at the time. “What is unique to residential and small clinics and office buildings done in late 1950s and 1960s around Seattle were these light on the land, wood-frame post-andbeam, very transparent/very breatheable buildings,” he points out. DESIGN FOR ADAPTABILITY

The Discovery Center’s primary program requirement was to create a building and core with an adaptable interior exhibit space. The space could then be reconfigured and reused for the presentation of multiple residential neighborhoods throughout South Lake Union over a number of years. This flexibility has made it possible for the exhibit space to be re-fitted since its initial construction so the developer could present a new series of residential communities coming on-line.

and 73 feet in length). Each modular assembly is then capable of being moved to a new location in the future, reconnected, and reused – either in its current capacity or as an adaptive reuse project. All interior and exterior finishes and assemblies have a joint at this break point, covered by a removable plate, cap, or coping to suit each surface or location. The building’s demountable features are visible inside the center through use of narrow aluminum closure plates on the floor and wall surfaces where they cross the disconnect joints. Barrier-free access to the main entrance and the catering kitchen is maintained through gangway ramps with integrated hinged joints, allowing the ramps to adapt to the topography of future building locations. The linear service bar component, housing the service functions of the pavilion, faces the park and is clad with softer wood materials and colors to blend in with the adjacent park. Expansive floor-to-ceiling glass along the street facade also opens the interior of the building to the sidewalk and streetscape, inviting pedestrians to visit the free exhibits inside. The wood roof structure cantilevers over the steel frame to provide a broad eave and protection from the elements. SUSTAINABLE SHOWCASE

In addition to creating a flexible interior space, the building itself is demountable. The building envelope effectively incorporates three disconnect joints to break the structure into four equal modules (each 40 feet in width

Second Quarter 2009

Through close collaboration with Vulcan, which has long demonstrated a commitment to sustainable design practices, Miller and his team were able to incorporate wide ranging environmental strategies into the project. These

included: off-site prefabrication for greater construction efficiencies, daylighting, storm water management with on-site bio-retention swales, and recycled and environmentally-responsible building materials. The center takes a minimalist approach to the 79,290-square-foot lot. Its structure sits lightly on the land, preserving the gently sloping terrain atop short concrete piers. Building edges are cantilevered, allowing the grade and vegetation to run uninterrupted beneath.

beam purlins at 4-feet on center, spanning 20 feet from frame-to-frame; oriented-strand-board sheathing spans perpendicularly across the purlins without the need for any intermediate joist framing. Environmentally-responsible materials included: 500 cubic yards of recycled concrete used as sub-base at the parking area; concrete containing fly ash; composite decking planks with recycled content at exterior decking areas; paper-based countertops, partitions, and exhibit display casework; oriented-strand board and laminated-strand lumber; linoleum; and carpet with recycled content.

Materials

Water Conservation and Use

The Site

Several factors drove the selection of materials, including durability, recycled content and environmental responsibility – as well as an ability to support the project’s demountable requirements. The structure is comprised of four-sided steel bents, paired with bolted connections to free-span the interior gallery and exhibit space. Together with the use of GLB wood purlins and OSB sheathing, this decision allowed for most of the structure to be pre-fabricated off-site and complete the finishes within a controlled environment. The steel frames incorporate shop-welded rigid corner connections with splice plates and exposed bolted connections at the vertical components of the bents. All finish-painted frame components were then transported to the site, joisted into place, and spliced together quickly and efficiently. The roof framing system features glued-laminated

trim tab

The project utilizes a variety of techniques to manage storm water runoff, with an emphasis on low-impact design strategies to slow and filter the water on site so no new detention tanks were necessary. In addition, high-efficiency toilets and waterless urinals reduce the project’s water use to just 45,000 gallons per year — a 15 percent reduction in internal water use, compared with a typical building of this type. Energy

Electrical, lighting and mechanical systems are each contained within the 40-foot modules for practical disassembly and reassembly. The electrical system spans the entire building, but the main electrical conduit below the floor incorporates a disconnect junction box beneath each of the three separation joints so that only one electrical connection needs to be severed

and reestablished when the building is disassembled and moved. The building also utilizes air-source heat pumps for heating and cooling. Indoor Environment

One of the goals for the SLU Discovery Center was to create a building with abundant daylighting. East-facing, full-height glass fills the interior with comfortable, ambient daylight throughout the day. The glass façade slopes inward as it reaches the highest point of the structure, while the exposed roof above slopes down toward the west, allowing daylight to reach deep into the space. NEXT LIFE

Has this project in any way changed Miller|Hull’s approach to design? “Yes,” responds David Miller. Modular building techniques may be applied to a new wetlands research

and education center for Cascadia Community College in Bothell – the largest restored site in Washington, located right on campus. But instead of moving the structure, its adaptable design will enable the building to add more bays as funding becomes available. “We’re also exploring the idea of less welding with steel and more bolted connections,” he adds. “This makes it easier to take a building apart and reconfigure it in the future, if necessary, rather than having to break welds or grind up materials.” Someday soon, on a quiet Sunday afternoon in South Lake Union, expect to see an entire building, separated into 20by 60-foot sections – exhibits, offices, bathrooms, a catering kitchen, a conference room, a standing seam roof – on trailers slowly moving down Westlake Avenue to a new location. Ready for reuse. Ready for its next life.

SLU Discovery Center: Just the Facts Location:

Seattle

Building type(s): Commercial

office, Community/New construction/11,000 sq. feet Completed: March 2005 Architect: The Miller | Hull Partnership, Seattle Client/Owner: Vulcan Real Estate, Seattle Contractor: GLY Construction, Bellevue Consultants: Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Seattle (civil and structural engineer); Brumbaugh and Associates, Seattle (landscape architect); MICE North America, Phoenix (interiors); Candela, Seattle (lighting); Universal Mechanical, Mukilteo, Wash. (mechanical/plumbing contractor); Cochran Electric, Seattle (electrical contractor) Awards and Recognition 2008 AIA/COTE National Top Ten Green Projects Gold, Best Pavilion, National Assoc. of Home Builders 2007 Lifecycle Building Challenge, Building Category Sustainable Design Award, Boston Society of Arch’s. © MILLER|HULL

Dave Macaulay is author of Integrated Design: Mithun (Ecotone Publishing, 2008) and co-author of The Ecological Engineer: KEEN Engineering (Ecotone Publishing, 2005) and a contributor to AIA COTEnotes, GreenSource magazine, and other publications.

Second Quarter 2009

09.17.09 GREEN BROKER REGISTER TODAY FOR YOUR INTRODUCTION TO THE GREEN BUILDING UNIVERSE REGISTER NOW!

take advantage of early registration rates

LEARN ABOUT SPONSORSHIP

• Get up to speed with green design • Learn the financial benefits of building and leasing green • Network with leaders in the field • Meet green building and valuation experts from across the region • Learn about the new Certified Green Broker Education Course Jerry Yudelson: Jerry has spoken about green building all over the U.S., as well as in Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany and Australia. His speeches and workshops motivate people to understand the business case for building and developing green. Jason F. McLennan: Author, award-winning designer and CEO of Cascadia Region Green Building Council, Jason delivers vision and pragmatism, a winning combination for tough economic and environmental times.

09.17.09 – Seattle, WA – Seattle Center, Olympic and Rainier Rooms 1st Ave. N. & Republican

ED GRE TIFI

BROKE EN

CER

Sponsor Green Broker and connect with a dynamic audience of brokers, building managers and other real estate professionals.

Green Broker is a new and exciting conference designed for the commercial real estate and financial communities, and for anyone looking for a solid introduction to the future of the building industry: green building.

CERTIFIED GREEN BROKER

CERTIFIED GREEN BROKERS STAND OuT IN A CROwDED FIELD

The Certified Green Broker program prepares brokers and other real estate professionals to take a leadership role in the burgeoning green building marketplace. THE GREEN BROKER CONFERENCE AND THE CERTIFIED GREEN BROKER PROGRAM ARE BOTH PRESENTED BY

CLICK

for more info

we’ve created ten three-hour online seminars, for a total of 30 hours of real estate CEus. Become a Certified Green Broker by participating in ten sessions and taking a twohour exam. Visit www.greenbrokereducation.com for more information.

WHATâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S IN YOUR WATER? If there is rigid PVC piping in your community water system, you and your family could be exposed to bacteria, lead and other toxins. PVC has been banned by: The City of San Francisco The City of Seattle Microsoft Target Walmart Go to www.CleanWaterPipeCouncil.org to learn more about the potential health and environmental impacts of rigid PVC in your community water system.

CLICK

for more info about this important issue

BY JENNY SEIF ERT

Thomas Crum: Dennis A Coach for the Mind,Wilde: An Evangelist Heart and Spirit for Change

Thomas Crumâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s journey to becoming an expert in effective stress management and conflict resolution, like his teachings, has been a journey of the mind, heart and spirit. Just out of college, with a wife, newborn child, and a degree in math and education, Tom took a job as a systems analyst with a multi-national company. Within a year he felt his soul was being sucked out of him. So he and his family packed their VW van and followed their hearts, landing in Aspen, Colorado. There, Tom taught at an alternative charter school and started the Aspen Academy of Martial Arts, where he studied and taught Aikido and meditation. Singer John Denver became one of his students and a personal friend, and by the mid-seventies he was traveling the world with John as his coach and bodyguard on concert tours. story continues

trim tab

that all conflicts are negative, we continuously destroy the opportunity that conflict provides—to strengthen relationships, build greater trust, and to learn about others and ourselves. There is always energy to be gained from conflict and, as I demonstrate on the physical level in the martial art of Aikido, it is blending with and redirecting that energy that produces powerful results. To be a good leader, we must have the ability to be calm and centered in stressful times, so that we can create conscious dialogue and build effective relationships and teams. What are the physiological and psychological impacts of stress? What is the cost of stress on the economy; on the environment; on our communities? TT:

A 2001 study from the American Institute of Stress showed that nearly half of all workers say they need help in learning how to manage stress, approximately one million workers are absent every day due to stress, and job stress costs U.S. industry over $300 billion annually as a result of accidents, absenteeism, employee turnover, diminished productivity and directly related medical, legal and insurance costs. TC:

Sharing deeply compatible interests in the environment and social justice, Tom and John co-founded the Windstar Foundation on 1000 acres of ranch and wilderness in Old Snowmass, Colorado in 1976. By the mid 80’s, they were recognized for teaching and demonstrating bio-intensive gardening, bio-domes, alternative energy prototypes, as well as for conducting educational symposia on social issues. Some of the pioneers of the sustainability movement, including Bucky Fuller, Jean Michele Cousteau and Amory Lovins, have served on their board. (Today, Lovins’ Rocky Mountain Institute is located on the Windstar land.) During this journey, Tom realized that his work had coalesced into a system of effectively dealing with conflict and stress. An agent of Simon and Schuster discovered his conflict resolution workshops and encouraged him to work on a book that S&S published in 1987. The Magic of Conflict became a best seller, and he found himself back on the road. Three books, including his latest Three Deep Breaths: Finding Power and Purpose in a Stressed Out World, and many years later, Tom is still on the road, learning and sharing. A recent stop on Tom’s journey was Living Future 2009, Cascadia’s Unconference for Deep Green Professionals, in Portland, OR. As a prelude to his keynote, Tom took some time to explain to Trim Tab his conflict resolution philosophy and techniques and how these can be used by sustainability movement leaders to effectively enable change. What are the basic tenets to your approach to conflict resolution, leadership and stress management? TRIM TAB:

Conflict is nature’s primary motivator for change. Yet, through a series of misperceptions, such as equating conflict with a win/lose contest, or thinking THOMAS CRUM:

Second Quarter 2009

Stress is a part of life. Whether it’s “dis-stressful” on our mind, body, or spirit or actually beneficial has a great deal to do with how we respond. Stress is one of the best opportunities to become wiser, stronger, and more flexible. In this technology-exploding, information-overloading, and relationship-eroding world we are jeopardizing our productivity, our creativity and our vitality needed to make a more conscious and green environment. As we become more capable of transforming our personal stressors into vitality, our ability to create a more sustainable world around us grows significantly. Then, as we become more green and sustainable, we begin to eliminate the sources of so many stressors: pollution, the economic and security issues surrounding an oil-based economy, and unhealthy and unstimulating working environments. The opportunity for a positive, upward spiral is our choice. How does your technique, Three Deep Breaths, work? Can you summarize it for our readers? TT:

Science has shown us that there are three “C’s” of a stress resistant immune system: TC:

1. A sense of CONTROL over your response to life

events;

2. A sense of COMMITMENT to something be-

yond your ego (i.e. family, service, religion, or life philosophy); 3. A sense of CHALLENGE and learning opportunity when confronted with a stressor.

The Three Deep Breaths technique is a mind-body process that achieves the three C’s by cognitively changing our thoughts, while balancing our autonomic nervous system through the breath: 1. The Centering Breath gives us the calm and balance we need to respond appropriately rather than react negatively in stressful situations. 2. The Possibility Breath reminds us of a purpose higher than our ego. 3. The Discovery Breath turns a stressful situation into a crucial learning opportunity. How can your techniques be helpful in finding balance in light of the current economic and environmental crisis?

As we break some of these old patterns and beliefs, we will also be aware of times when conflicts aren’t really conflicts, but rather mutually interdependent constructs that need to be brought into balance. Consider breathing: which is more important, inhalation or exhalation? Joining the battle between one and the other, which “side” would you be on? We can see the lunacy of this “conflict.” Likewise, we need to recognize that the tensions between constructs such as structure vs. flexibility, old school vs. new school, or conservatism vs. liberalism should not lead us to a war over which is right, but to the recognition that both have a place and need to be understood and brought into balance, just like breathing in and out.

TT:

In the first breath of Three Deep Breaths, the centering breath, you become more present and aware. As this happens, you naturally become more connected to your environment; it ceases to be something “other” and starts to become an intrinsic part of you. In the second breath, the possibility breath, you tap into opening your mind at the highest level of purpose, keeping you on the path of appropriate actions (including wise environmental choices). The third breath, the breath of discovery, keeps you fascinated, bringing you creative insights and practical solutions. TC:

Moreover, concepts from the Magic of Conflict approach support us to be more effective at influencing those resistant forces that constantly push back when it comes to transforming our world into a more sustainable one. Consider the unnecessary, costly, and time-consuming battles between environmentalists and big business or between the green designers and traditional builders. A myth that gets perpetuated throughout history is that conflict is a contest. Most people today are raised consciously or unconsciously with training in competition. Male or female—from card games to business competition—the attitude is in-bred. “Go for the kill” may need to happen on the battlefield, but it doesn’t need to happen in the city council meeting. We must break the pattern of seeing all differences as a win-lose contest. Add to this dilemma the psychological research that there is an innate human characteristic of “in grouping/loyalty.” Humans have a ferocious tendency for building one army or team against another. This may be good for a football game, but in the case of a green designer approaching a CFO, it is counterproductive to take sides. Instead, the energy is better spent on recognizing common needs and wants and building creative solutions.

trim tab

TT: What is the “power of

centering” and how is it essential to leadership and positive change? Many people make decisions primarily on the basis of the mind: thoughts, rationale, historical beliefs and prejudices; others on emotions: sensations, gut impulses, intuition, spontaneity. Center is a place that includes both thoughts and emotions, but considers them to be useful input rather than “truths” per se. The most constructive decisions are made from a calmer, more creative space where the mind (thoughts), the body (emotion), and the spirit (one’s orientation to the unknown) are integrated. Center is not some mystical, ambiguous concept. Centering is a psycho-physiological state that is verifiable. In workshops, I teach physical skills that test and develop center, so one develops a biofeedback system to further develop centering on a daily basis. As centering grows within, we are able to make better choices as leaders because we have increased focus, heightened awareness, and a deeper sense of connection. As we all know, great leadership is all about focus, awareness, and the ability to develop powerful relationships. TC:

What are the common obstacles to finding centeredness? How can we overcome them? TT:

Being too busy to notice—noticing that we are not thinking clearly; that we are not focused and calm; that we are not present. Once we take a moment to center and be aware, a curative process begins. When we are aware that we’re not being good listeners, we naturally begin to develop a more receptive state. When we are aware that we are physically off-balance, we naturally make adjustments. With awareness, we learn how not to react to the ups and downs in life; that is, we aren’t run by our emotions and historical prejudices, addicted to the ups and fearful of the downs. A daily practice like centering reshapes our brain, creating more powerful neurological pathways. Centering allows us to respond appropriately, rather than react in a knee-jerk fashion. TC:

What techniques should social movement leaders exhibit in order to be successful change agents? TT:

Techniques of centered communication. When social movement leaders deal with conflicts and resistance, they often become aware that “something needs to change,” but then assign that “something” (usually in the form of blame) to the other party. Or they just “talk around” the issues. To resolve conflicts we need to face what can be a difficult task—we need to be willing to change ourselves: how we communicate, how we act, how acutely and honestly we identify conflict and accept responsibility. Finding real solutions is a co-creation process. Leaders need to be proactive and they need to dialogue with conflicting parties within a context of mutual respect and an honoring of the needs and concerns of all sides. In this way they can be most influential and inspirational. TC:

is trite but true: becoming green makes dollars and sense. The connection of sustainability and green-ability with one’s personal health, joy, and pocketbook must constantly be made if we are going to break people’s resistance to change. In Aikido, I show people how to physically blend with and redirect an attacker’s energy. Now is the time to use the Green Movement to blend with the tumultuous “energy” and needs of the world today and to redirect them to a sustainable future. TT:

What’s your vision for a sustainable world?

For me, sustainability is creating a world in which all of us have the resources to fulfill our highest potential for health, meaning and contribution in a manner that insures that those resources and more will be available for all future generations. TC:

TT: How can your techniques be applied to the sustainability

and green building movement?

TC: We must speak to people’s needs. Are people interested

in prosperity in the long run, in terms of both happiness and economics? Of course. Then people need to know that becoming green is getting what they really want. The adage

jenn y seif ert is the Oregon Assistant Director of the Cascadia Region Green Building Council and the managing editor of Trim Tab. She has also written for Ecometro.com.

Transformational Lecture Series The world’s most visionary thought leaders share their experiences and wisdom on the topics that underpin and motivate the green building industry. These lectures promise to inspire a revolution!

Guy Battle, Director, Battle McCarthy Ltd. Upcoming Lecture!

Low Energy Buildings and Sustainable Communities: Designing for the Zero Carbon Economy DESIGNING FOR THE ZERO CARBON ECONOMY Wednesday, June 24 – Portland, OR Thursday, June 25 – Seattle, WA

For more information and to register, click here or visit: http://www.cascadiagbc.org/education/transformational-lecture-series sponsored by:

SUBJECT:

FW: Read This!

TO:

CC:

FROM:

Articles, websites and other social media that are also turning the ship

Cascadia is hiring! We’re seeking talented and motivated candidates to fill these positions: Oregon Assistant Director Chief Operating Officer Administrative Assistant

Dear Readers, Trim Tab introduces this new section, which will contain interesting and forward-thinking social media pieces that are also raising awareness and facilitating change. We encourage you to check them out! Simply click on the headings below. ThisIsReality.org A blog devoted to revealing the truth about “clean” coal. It’s as real as unicorns. Watch the Coen Brothers try to sell the illusion of “Clean Coal”

“A Hog in a Tuxedo is Still a Hog: The NAIOP Disinformation Study” Architecture 2030’s Special Bulletin on a misleading study revealing the false (in)feasibility of reducing building energy consumption.

“Aiming for the Stars: A manifesto in the guise of a standard that raises the bar” GreenSource’s recent feature article on the Living Building Challenge.

For the complete job description, please visit the Cascadia Job Board

COLUM N BY BILL WALS H

Toxic Assets 18

Second Quarter 2009

President Obama has rightfully linked our economic recovery to our environmental recovery. But we need to break the link between the corporate behavior that drove us to the brink of financial ruin in the first place and that which continues to drive us towards ecological ruin. Like the economic collapse, our ecological collapse is being fueled by industries creating widespread social risk in their reckless and dangerous pursuit of short-term profits. What’s worse, their modus operandi includes massive public relations campaigns, philanthropy and lobbying efforts that portray their self-interested behavior as part of the societal solution. Think Clean Coal. In the green building movement, the leading example of this behavior is the rebranding of virtually every building material as a “green” product, officially recognized by one label or another. The green label craze resembles the virus-like uptake of the financial assets known as collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), the so-called derivatives that brought down the financial house. CDOs purported to apportion risk, protect conservative investors and assure long-term economic stability. But CDOs, like green labels, were really a Trojan horse. Journalist Matt Taibbi’s recent R-rated description of the CDO rage in Rolling Stone Magazine sounds like a description of green product marketing today: “Suddenly, thanks to this financial seal of approval, banks had a way to turn their shittiest mortgages and other financial waste into investment-grade paper.... The problem was, none of this was based on reality.... To get AAA ratings, the CDOs relied not on their actual underlying assets but on crazy mathematical formulas that the banks cooked up to make the investments look safer than they really were.”1 Relying upon the fraudulent AAA ratings, the most conservative investors unwittingly fueled the machinery of their own ruin. Relying upon the plethora of greenwash labels and certifications will have a similar ironic outcome – the most committed environmental consumers unwit-

tingly fueling the industrial engines that have driven and continue to drive us towards ecological collapse. The bad mortgages sold by Citibank and the bad debts bundled into the CDOs by insurance behemoth AIG have been labeled “toxic assets.” Their detoxification depends largely upon the full faith and credit of the US Government, i.e. the Fed’s ability to create wealth by printing money. But the Fed won’t be able to create species gone extinct and cultures extinguished under the greenwash forest certification standards authored by the timber industry, or undo the avoidable reproductive problems caused by endocrine-disrupting chemicals in thousands of greenlabeled products. Whole systems of banking, insurance and credit thought “too big to fail” have failed. We are all too aware that big ecological systems – arable land, fresh water, the climate are under stress. Their collapse has the potential to make this economic crisis look like kids’ stuff. All it takes is another Katrina in New Orleans, or another tsunami, this time in L.A., or another Chernobyl, the plume this time spreading across the US bread basket or California’s Central Valley, or the final disappearance of honey bees. Or maybe it will be some statistically impossible combination of ecological crises, as unlikely to happen as say mortgages, insurance and credit failing all at once. Our major industries – mining, timber, energy, chemicals, plastics – have been reinventing their images, not their industries. Ubiquitous green labels and advertising are part of the problem, not the solution. If it seems too easy being green these days, remember how easy it was to refinance your mortgage two years ago. This article was originally published on May 6, 2009 in Health Building News. Bill Walsh is the Executive Director of the Healthy Building Network.

endnotes

[1] Taibbi, Matt “The Big Takeover.” Rolling Stone, Issue 1075. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_ takeover trim tab

Leadership: Scarce Resource or Vast Reservoir? by Pa u l W e r de r

Many people believe leadership is a function of position, charismatic personality, or notoriety. In looking at leadership this way, the field is narrowed even further, because a lot of leaders with those characteristics are not real leaders at all. They put on their masks and play the game, but their ineffectiveness or self-serving agendas tell the real story. From this perspective, leadership is a scarce resource, one that makes us feel fortunate if we ever get to work with one of the few good ones. Another view of leadership is that you already have everything you need to be a great leader in the arena that you work in. Real leadership is a matter of having the heart to make your full contribution—today, tomorrow, and the next day. From this perspective, we have thousands of leaders carrying the responsibility for environmental transformation in the building industry. These leaders have no authority to change societal consciousness, but they have a passion for preserving our planet’s beauty and natural resources. These leaders have a variety of personalities that range from quiet, ornery hardheads, to articulate, open minded teddy bears; but they all have the ability to connect with people about what truly matters. These leaders largely work without fanfare or recognition; the people who benefit from their leadership, however, know who they are. To succeed with our transformational cause, transformation is required at the level of the individual. Individuals who never thought of themselves as leaders need to stick their necks out. They need to express the passion in their hearts in ways that move people to take new actions. And you — the current green building practitioners — have done this. You have already made an impact to our industry and built some significant momentum. However, we need to accelerate our progress and expand our leadership exponentially. To do this, we need to move people to action even more effectively. Channeling the Passion

Let’s look at this more closely. You have a passion for contribution that is your highest authority. Passion is all we

Second Quarter 2009

really have to stand on. To use our passion most effectively, we must appeal to people’s emotions and concerns with optimism and a sense of possibility. It is not enough to present the data that climate change is an inevitable danger. We need to have the tough conversations that address the underlying fear and hopelessness that prevents some people from engaging in the idea that business as usual is no longer viable. Our passion for these tough conversations needs to be measured with sensitivity. If we show up as newly converted zealots on a mission to impose our passion on others, we are doing everyone a disservice. We need to set aside our judgments of those who have not yet seen the light. We need to reach out to those who are still doubtful, as friends not foes. We need to trust that everyone has a heart that values and longs to take the high road. To have these conversations effectively, we need to engage people where they are with respect and understanding; that is, they must be engaged with heart. Acceptance and inclusion are two key ingredients in the art of influence. We need to listen carefully to what people care about. We need to understand what inhibits their passion for both societal and personal change. In doing so, we can weave our own perspective into what matters to the person we are speaking with. Done respectfully, this dialogue begins to create trust in our leadership as a service to their highest intentions. The outcome of this type of true engagement at the heart level is that both people learn something and both people grow. They each go forward more prepared to do their own part to change the world. The Time is Now!

There is no need to wait for the perfect time or the right audience. The people we are meant to influence are already in our lives. Right now you are perfectly prepared to passionately engage the people you are working with to see things in a new way—to create a new understanding of business as usual. However we often don’t see it that way and we miss our opportunities. We spend our time performing the functions we’ve been trained in and were hired for. We work diligently to meet deadlines, satisfy customers, and keep a roof over our head. These functions are necessary and they can bring us a sense of satisfaction. But if we want to embrace our own leadership, somewhere deep inside we know this is not our real work. As leaders, we see that things need to change in a big way, but sometimes when it comes to addressing changes with the people in our immediate environment, we get a bit intimidated. It’s tough asking a colleague, client, or subcon-

tractor to consider a higher standard, or to challenge the level of “good enough” in people you’ve worked with for years. You are taking on a big risk when you ask people to risk what they are comfortable with. So, how do you step into leadership if this risk is foreign territory? You begin with one person who respects you, one uncomfortable conversation, and one risk that you are willing to take. The truth about leadership is that the person who raises their hand and effectively proposes a better future is called a leader. Will you fail? Yes, sometimes you will. Will you be uncomfortable? Yes, sometimes you will be very uncomfortable. And will you make a difference? Yes, not always, but more often than you think. You will learn to express your passion with sensitivity and to connect with people in a more meaningful manner. Ultimately, you will learn that the people you were reluctant to approach with more intimate, risky conversations will recognize you for the courage you brought to them.

As this form of personal transformation expands exponentially, we will look back and realize expressing leadership wasn’t as hard as we first imagined. We will realize that we were the ones we were waiting for. This will allow us to make our complete contribution to the world. That’s all that’s ever been expected of the great leaders in history: to give everything they have to what matters. Are you willing to be a great leader in your own realm? If so, there’s a vast reservoir of leadership that just got a little deeper.

Paul Werder is the CEO and founder of LionHeart Consulting Inc. www.lionhrt.com

THE GREEN WASH

trim tab

Sessions available now! Responsible Industry Alexander von Bismarck and Andrea Johnson from the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA)

Living Building Leader cultivates thought and action influentials around the world.

Building Corporate Responsibility with Adrian Henriques, author of “Corporate Truth:the Limits to Transparency”

A series of online sessions, the program provides the building industry a means to develop the diverse and intensive skill set needed to effect transformative change.

Biophilia with Tim Beatley, Judith Heerwagen, and Bert Gregory

Anyplace. Anytime.

Check the website regularly for other offerings & the 2009 lineup.

Ecologicate your mind.

Energy sessions with Mark Frankel, Technical Director of New Buildings Institute.

www.livingbuildingleader.org

For more information about the Institute and to access the new on-line home for Living Building Challenge, visit:

www.ilbi.org

The ILBI is a non-governmental organization dedicated to the creation of a truly sustainable built environment in all countries around the world. Comprised of the leading green building experts, futurists and thought-leaders, we believe that providing a compelling vision for the future is a fundamental requirement of reconciling humanity’s relationship with the natural world.

Second Quarter 2009

by the Trim Tab edito rial t eam

The Bottom Line on Living Buildings

Cascadia Study Shows Economic Benefits of Self-Sustaining Structures

The building industry has expressed incredible enthusiasm and excitement toward The Living Building Challenge™ since it was first introduced at Greenbuild in 2006. Few green-minded professionals question the value or integrity of creating structures whose performance reaches net zero energy and water targets. But the initial reaction by many is expected: “Isn’t it going to cost significantly more?”

The study’s findings are remarkable, in that cost premiums for Living Buildings are considerably smaller than first expected. In many cases, they are within easy striking distance for many building types with very reasonable paybacks. The results clearly show that building type, location, size and the availability of incentives intermix to provide a wide range of economic implications. In Portland for example, the higher-ed facility would see no more than a 4-9 percent premium – well within reach for this building type. As a result, these numbers suggest that a more aggressive timeline to net zero energy and water for all university facilities should be pushed immediately. Other building types show premiums only in the 15-20 percent range, also showing that by slightly downsizing a project or raising slightly more capital, that this high level of performance could be built immediately.

To help quantify the costs and paybacks associated with designing and constructing Living Buildings, Cascadia partnered with SERA Architects, Skanska USA Building, Gerding/Edlen Development, New Buildings Institute and Interface Engineering (all national leaders in green building) on a comprehensive study of first-cost premiums and long-term paybacks. The team analyzed what it would cost to convert nine existing LEED Gold buildings to Living Buildings, exploring a variety of structures in different climates. The nine building types studied included: 1. Single family residence 2. University classroom building 3. K-8 school structure 4. Mixed-use renovation 5. Low-rise office building 6. Mid-rise office building 7. High-rise mixed-use skyscraper 8. Multifamily residential structure 9. Hospital The four sample climates examined included: 1. Portland, OR (temperate) 2. Atlanta, GA (hot/humid) 3. Phoenix, AZ (hot/arid) 4. Boston, MA (cool) trim tab

Even the most expensive option (hospital facilities that see no more than a 50 percent cost increase), while perhaps currently too large, are a far cry from the “doubling of cost” that many would predict. As the market continues to change, it is expected that these premiums will continue to drop further, potentially ushering a new era of truly sustainable architecture sooner than expected. A detailed cost comparison matrix can be found on the following pages; this and a full summary of the study are available at www.ilbi.org or simply click here.

Robert Bateman Centre at Royal Roads University in Victoria, BC. Rendering courtesy of Iredale Group Architecture.

LIVING BUILDING FINANCIAL STUD Y COS T COMPARISON M AT RI X

PORTLAND

UNIVERSIT Y CLASSROOM

SCHOOL K-8

35.4

28.2

kbtu/sf/year

LOW RISE OFFICE

MID RISE OFFICE

30.3

kbtu/sf/year

36.0

kbtu/sf/year

temperate

11 16 11-16

44-99 649 kw

40.3

968k

24.8

kbtu/sf/year

% 18-23 years / $263/sf

273 kw

851 kw

122k

357k

35.5

kbtu/sf/year

24 29 224-29

% 25-30 years / $282/sf

1013 kw

301k

ATLANTA

29-344

% 10-15 years $247/sf /

% 2-7 years $337/s / f $337/sf

34.9

kbtu/sf/year

hot humid

112-17 2 17

1122-117 17

% 8-13 years $304/sf

PHOENIX hot arid

271 kw

773 kw

301k

968k

122k

357k

23.0

kbtu/sf/year

34.2

kbtu/sf/year

116-21 6 21

119-24 9-244

981 kw

569kw

205 kw

591 kw

523k

27k 95k

195k 153k

72k

48.6

445k

35.7

kbtu/sf/year

301k

% 6-11 years $272/sf

1224 kw 968k

% 16-21 years $231/sf

43.4

kbtu/sf/year

117-22 7-22

32 37 332-37

% 20-25 years $243/sf

43.6

kbtu/sf/year

1617 kw

355 -440

% 12-17 years $221/sf

176k

% 6-11 years $395/sf

Second Quarter 2009

34.3

kbtu/sf/year

116-21 6 21

% 15-20 years $222/sf

776 kw

38.4

53k

cool

26 31 26-31

% 21-26 years $239/sf

743 kw

% 10-15 years $304/sf

BOSTON

33 33-39 3-39

% 8-13 years $207/sf

kbtu/sf/year

4444 -49 499

% 16-21 years $319/sf

36 41 36-41

% 10-15 years $305/sf

330 kw

930 kw

122k

357k

Total array size in kilo watts Total water use in kilo gallons

357k blackwater greywater rainwater

Resultant Energy Use Intensity in kbtu/sf/year

MIXED USE RENOVATION

37.2

Payback period

36.8

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

117-22 7-22 35.3

23k

17.1

2 23-28

654 kw

376k

31k

11.5

21-226

% 9-14 years $166/sf

22.0

3 33-38

4 kw

513 kw

% 39-44 years $218/sf

45.5

14k 17k

19.5

2266-31 311

% 6-11 years $221/sf

227k

38 43 38-43

% 22-27 years $277/sf

26k

1685k

2525k

633k

446 4465 65 kw 1601k

4288k

kbtu/sf/year

20 25 220-25

3 32-37

% 11-16 years $187/sf

% 10-15 years $368/sf

19 1976 976 kw 1997k

2525k

3439 439 kkw w 3903k

321k

4288k 386k

148.0 kbtu/sf/year

912 kw 91

358 3582 8 2 kw

3 32-37

% 8-13 years $244/sf

1801k

2688k

118.7

23 28 223-28

10 1096k

% 11-16 years $363/sf

25 2556 556 kw

32-37 1296k

1921k

32 37 332-37

% 13-18 years $188/sf

% 12-17 years $166/sf

130kk

4288k

kbtu/sf/year

9 kw

2368k

117.4

40.5

kbtu/sf/year

1578 kw 376k

1296k

28.5

kbtu/sf/year

425k

4959 495 59 kw

20 25 20-25

% 19-24 years $129/sf

999k

2525k

kbtu/sf/year

39-4 39-44

11 1 9k 182k 119k

1866k

30.9

kbtu/sf/year

855 8 5 kw

kbtu/sf/year

357k

% 9-14 years / $411/sf

31 3143 143 kw

% 20-25 years $129/sf

1180k

2 21-26

% 13-18 years / $215/sf

kbtu/sf/year

7 kw

% 29-34 years $210/sf

kbtu/sf/year

30.6

kbtu/sf/year

1143 kw

33.6

trim tab

959k

31-36

kbtu/sf/year

75k

1296k

355 4 35-40

% 12-17 years $168/sf

123.9

825 kw 267k

HOSPITAL

16 21 16-21

% 22-27 years / $148/sf

21.8

kbtu/sf/year

HIGH RISE MIXED USE kbtu/sf/year

6 kw 9k

Section indicating form changes

2 26-31

% 27-32 years / $234/sf

357k

indicating PV, site and massing change s

32.0

kbtu/sf/year

1433 kw

kbtu/sf/year

MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL

200 2 20-25

% 11-16 years / $194/sf

Site plan

$146/sf

23.2

kbtu/sf/year

15-20 years

Direct Construction Cost

15.5

kbtu/sf/year

15 -220

Cost premium (%)

273 kw

2525k

517k

% 6-11 years $469/sf

56 5666 6 66 kw 2093k

4288k

2196k

Challenging the Wisdom of Exaggerated Height and Density in Urban Structures

Density and Sustainability â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

A Radical Perspective story by jason f. mclennan

Second Quarter 2009

Cities of the Future should be Ecologically Benign, Socially Just and Culturally Rich We have all seen the futuristic, sci-fi depictions of what our cities of tomorrow are supposedly going to look like. These Blade Runner-esque wastelands are as depressing as they are ridiculous and they are certainly not the kinds of places where we want our children and grandchildren to live. They present a foregone conclusion that our cities will end up as megalopolises filled with skyscrapers that stretch for miles – taking New York, Tokyo, Singapore and Hong Kong to an absurd level of density and height. Unfortunately, many in the green building community seem captivated by so-called Eco-high-rises and green skyscrapers and assume that the sky-high buildings portrayed in books and movies are not only coming, but are best for us from a sustainability standpoint. There is a belief that more density and height is always better.” I disagree. As global populations rise and resources diminish, I propose an alternative way of thinking about the greening of our city structures. I believe that there is, like so many things in life, a “sweet-spot” between density and height as well as culture and the environment. Contrary to popular thinking, I believe that there is a point at which the sustainability benefits of density and building height diminish – then actually reverse! Cities of the Future

The cities of the future should be more than ecologically benign; they must also be socially just and culturally rich. As today’s designers, urban planners, politicians

trim tab

and architects, we have a responsibility to seek urban form that achieves the highest possible level of cultural, social, aesthetic and environmental goals. Solutions that achieve one or two at the expense of the others are, in the long-term, failures. Such is the story of most of today’s cities. Unfortunately, the same can be said for the current planning and visions of the city of the future that revolve around excessive height and density. Putting Density in its Vertical Place

We’ve known for some time that the lower the urban density, the greater the environmental burdens and the more dramatic the societal impact. There are countless scholarly articles about the ills of suburban sprawl and low-density development. Since the 1990s, the negative reality of how we transformed our cities from World War II onward has finally sunk in. When people are spread out, public transportation systems lose their effectiveness, private vehicle use rises, pollution increases and the citizens’ interconnectedness and cultural connections suffer. We have paved over farmland and forestland for strip malls and lollypop subdivisions. I have no debate with these realizations. The suburban model is broken and destructive. When presented against our litmus test of ecologically benign, socially just and culturally rich communities, they fail miserably. I do take issue, however, with the disparagement of all low-density communities, including small rural towns that traditionally had a purpose as the breadbasket of our nation. As bedroom communities, they are disastrous,

but as centers of rich agricultural life, they are essential. There is nothing wrong with living on an acre or more if you are raising chickens and growing a large percentage of your vegetables! With that said, let’s leave the well-worn path of low density out of this discussion and focus on a current sacred cow: the assumption that density and building height is always good and the more there is of it, the better. The question we should ask ourselves is simple.

What building heights and urban densities result in the maximum benefits to culture, society and the environment? The Sweet Spot

I believe the answer might surprise a few people. The Nature of Limits and Finding the Sweet Spot

In the natural world, it is commonly understood that there are limits to the density of any one species on a given area of land. These limits are never hard and fast rules, but are based on the carrying capacity of the land that varies through time and location. Too many of any one animal in any one place results in less than ideal conditions for the whole. There are limits, but we believe our cleverness removes these rules on our behalf. We build how we like because we think we can and the results of this attitude are becoming painfully clear. So, let’s skip right to the punch line. I believe that there should be limits to the density of our cities and to the heights of the buildings in which the majority of humanity lives. I believe that there is a “sweet spot” or optimal range that results in the kind of urbanity that best meets our test and should guide our long-term vision of the cities of tomorrow. I believe that this sweet spot tends to be in the four-to-eight-story height range at densities between 30 and 100 dwelling units/ acre for reasons that I’ll outline shortly. Depending on circumstances, this range could be extended downward to two-to-three stories and upwards to twelve-to-fourteen (with corresponding adjustments to density). But the sweet spot is between four and eight. The remainder of this article presents a series of arguments that explain my rationale. Each argument alone is not enough, but I believe that in concert they make a compelling case for my theory. As you will see, a built environment within the “sweet spot” of height (assuming an urban fabric and most decidedly not isolated buildings in the landscape) results in the best mix of energy efficiency while retaining a fundamental human-to-nature connection. Within my proposed range, the best results are achieved: enough density to allow for car-free living in a city that is resilient and walkable, while keeping us close enough to the ground to maintain our relationship with the Earth and with one another. In this regard, density may be looked at from a spatial as well as a vertical perspective.

1 Story: Not productive 2-3 Stories: Good, but not ideal 4-8 Stories: Ideal 8-12 Stories: Good, but not ideal 12-14 Stories: Pushing it 14+ Stories: Increasing Impact

Second Quarter 2009

Making the Case

Capping the height and density of our communities will yield advantages on global, societal and personal levels. When the following individual arguments are considered together, they demonstrate the overwhelming strength of the idea. This combination of factors can usher in a better quality of life for and in our cities.

Cities like Barcelona and Amsterdam reach the right density to make car-free travel possible at a scale that is humane and connected to place.

Argument One – Living Buildings; Energy and Water Independence

The Living Building Challenge™ focuses on buildings that are energy- and water-independent. For single structure projects pursuing the Challenge, the program requires your building to generate all of its own energy on-site with renewable resources on a net annual basis, and to capture all water for use in the building through rainwater catchment, then treat it onsite for reuse. This is a radical departure from resource wasteful regional systems. That said, we recognize in the Living Building Challenge that the ideal scale for energy generation or water treatment and capture may not always be at the building level. The program has a system called “Scale Jumping” that allows for neighborhood/district scale systems as well. At this scale, buildings can share “resources” in a similar way that a forest shares resources without sizeable system losses and obscene levels of infrastructure. A decentralized system for energy and water is, in the long term, more economic, safer from a national security standpoint, and allows for more innovation due to the scale of solutions available. This is interesting: when you look technically at what it takes to produce net-zero energy and water buildings based on available solar energy, wind or rainfall, you end up with a maximum range between two and six stories in height trim tab

on a fully built-out urban site depending upon climate and building type. Building anything taller would require more surface area than exists to generate enough energy or capture enough water with the resources available. That height/density range can be extended based on a more district/neighborhood level approach. If we believe in a future of carbon-neutral cities with decentralized neighborhood and building scale systems, then our sweet spot is activated. Argument Two – Density and Transportation Effectiveness

In an ideal and truly sustainable city, people should be able to walk or bike for any of their daily needs, and the city’s density would support renewably-powered public transportation systems to take people further afield when necessary. A truly walkable, pedestrian-oriented community is the most democratic and socially just, allowing people of all ages access to the services they require, whether they can drive or not. At the densities suggested in our “sweetspot,” this idea is reached perfectly without the need for super-scaled, mass-people-moving systems that end up using even more energy. Argument Three – Security and Passive Survivability

In this discussion, it is important to consider the concept 29

of passive survivability: how a building’s inhabitants will fare when its power, heating and water systems fail. As the climate continues to change and weather patterns become less predictable, the possibility of system disruptions increase. Additionally, as we transition from a fossil fuel economy, supplies will inevitably decrease and potentially make our communities more vulnerable to disruptions. The taller the building, the more difficult it is to service its energy and water needs and the greater the reliance on globally-sourced materials to build and maintain them. Further, in the event of a catastrophe that cripples a structure’s system, the chance of escape diminishes with every vertical story that occupants must descend. At extreme heights, our cities and buildings become less resilient. What happens to be the maximum height that works without elevators? Six to eight stories…

which also say a lot about what we value as a society. The rise of corporate towers and expensive high-rise condos is telling, but perhaps diminishes our sense of place and the “specialness” of our communities. When all city structures reach to the sky and hide important visual markers, it becomes difficult for us to find our way and we lose any sense of architectural or sociological hierarchy. We should reserve extreme height for structures with societal importance, and leave a visual path that winds through our cities. It is noteworthy that maps of many modern American cities highlight corporate headquarters as the most prominent downtown buildings. We must be able to navigate our way through landscapes containing both natural and man-made vistas. Argument Five – 3,000 Years of Cultural Legacy

Argument Four – Way-Finding and Defining Place

Kevin Lynch’s great book, The Image of the City, describes how people know how to get around in their city or any city they are visiting by locating paths, edges, nodes or other wayfinding devices and comparing the locations of these markers to where they need to head. Our concept of a place is incredibly wrapped up in our “markers,”

Second Quarter 2009

I’ll keep this point simple. Perhaps several thousand years of continuous civilization means we got some things right? The most sought-after places to visit — the cities we view as cultural legacies of humanity — always fall within our sweet spot of height and density. Paris, Barcelona, Rome and Kyoto are just a few that come to mind. Enough said?

The extreme height and density of parts of Manhattan are exciting and intense, but I believe what makes New York work is its green heart – Central Park – is like a giant biophilic pressure release valve. Argument Six – The Need for Nature in the City: Biophilia

Biologist and researcher Edward O. Wilson popularized the notion of biophilia, which he described as “the connections that human beings subconsciously seek with the rest of life.” We thrive emotionally and physically, Wilson wrote, when we are in the presence of other organic forms. Even in our built environment, it is important that we retain this connection. (It is no accident that people put flowerpots on their high-rise balconies, indoor Ficus trees in their offices and electric tabletop fountains on their desks.) When density is disproportionate to nature and we are disconnected from our earthly surroundings, we face the very real risk of what writer Richard Louv has identified as “nature deficit disorder.” In this discussion, the question of New York always comes up. The extreme height and density of parts of Manhattan are exciting and intense, but I believe what makes New York work is that its green heart – Central Park – is like a giant biophilic pressure release valve. If Central Park were paved over with equally tall buildings as in mid-town Manhattan, I believe the city would fail.

trim tab

Argument Seven – Too High to see Faces: Evolutionary Support for Limited Height

There is an important architectural concept known as “Prospect and Refuge.” It is based on the idea that people derive psychological comfort from shelter that affords us a good view of the surroundings – enough to see threats coming, yet never too high to be disconnected from the landscape in order to make our escape. This makes sense if you consider our evolutionary history on the savannah, where prospect was afforded from a knoll or from a tree, such as the acacia that grows to no higher than 100 feet. (People would climb 40-60 feet at the most; there’s our sweet spot again.) One still sees this behavior in our closest evolutionary cousins: great apes. There was no need to go higher; mid-rise elevations offered long-range visibility while retaining visual clarity of what lay beneath. What is interesting about this degree of prospect is how it relates to our physiological abilities. The ability to recognize human features diminishes as we move away from a person’s face. Studies show that at 10 feet away, we can no longer see individual eyelashes. At 200 feet, we cannot distinguish the person’s eyes and have a difficult

Second Quarter 2009

time distinguishing one person from another. At 500 feet, we can make out a head but it appears blurry. So as we move out of our sweet spot above the ground, we are unable to visually process our fellow humans who stroll along the sidewalk below. This is okay from time to time, but how does this really affect us if this is our daily experience? Even more dramatically, what if this is our everyday experience during our formative years? What happens to our connection to life when people and all of the natural world are rarely more than a mere blur? This, I believe, creates a dangerous disconnection within the species. Equitability.

As we move toward a renewable world, it is imperative that we grant all people equal access to sunlight. It would be a tragedy if a building were to invest significant resources to install integrated photovoltaic’s, only to have another taller building put it in shadow and render it obsolete. Like access to fresh air, access to your own sunlight on your property should be a right. It is possible to plan for “solar envelopes” that guide city development and ensure that each property always has access to the light and free energy that it needs. But doing so means restricting building heights to within the “sweet spot” based on rational street widths.

Perhaps, like our oil-addicted culture, the skyscraper was a brief interlude in human history — a 100-year experiment in density and height that was impressive but never meant to last.

FAR LEFT: Could it be that children growing up so disconnected from the landscape and the proper “scale” of its surroundings, as those in the upper stories of this apartment building, are in some way developmentally disadvantaged? LEFT: Skyscrapers are out of proportion to the street widths below, making for dark, gloomy urban canyons. The only way to get any sun is to keep building higher and to hope your neighbor doesn’t steal your light down the road. BELOW: The Acacia tree, an important part of our evolutionary legacy, shares its scale with our “sweet-spot.”

Thinking Ahead

The greatest human societies — European, early North American, North African and Asian — built their cities in a height range that fits within the proposed ”sweet spot” for culturally rich, ecologically sound and socially just communities (although none of these is guaranteed by urban fabric, only enabled by it). They did this based on the reality of “limits” that did not burden them but allowed them to express culture and place for great local differences. The greatest of those still stand today as testaments to enduring cultural and societal legacies that stretch back for generations. It’s really only been in the last century when we have felt the need to rise to such architectural heights. Undeniably, there are skyscraping marvels standing in the world’s most impressive cities, but I look at them as exceptions to what should become a new urban rule. If livability is the goal and sustainability is the necessity, then we must start planning now for our cities to return from the clouds to grounded carbon-neutral communities. Perhaps, like our oil-addicted culture, the skyscraper was a brief interlude in human history — a 100-year experiment in density and height that was impressive but never meant to last.

trim tab

Solar Envelope Diagrams like this show how maximum building height and massing for a given latitude, grid orientation and street width to ensure that one building never negatively impacts another’s access to sun.

To be clear, I’m not talking about creating whole new cities from the ground up. Instead, I propose that we should gradually transform our existing communities. Cities, like living organisms, evolve over time. With careful and thoughtful planning, the urban areas of today can transition to the more environmentally sound cities that we envision for our future. Only a fraction of the buildings that currently stand in a city will remain in place 100 years from now. We are quick to forget how completely we transformed every major metropolitan area in North America to make room for the automobile from 1945-1975. Surely, with the urgent need to address climate change and other global environmental and energy problems, we can do the same again. In America, our efforts will result in greater overall density for almost every city and produce compact, walkable, pedestrian-oriented communities. But it must be done

endnotes

[1] Ken Yeang’s Green Skyscraper is an excellent example. [2] Two of my favorites include the Geography of Nowhere by James Kunstler and Ashphalt Nation by Jane Holtz Kay. [3] A great sociological study of this can be found in Robert Putnam’s seminal book Bowling Alone. [4] Again, it is critical that this is not seen as a hard and fast rule, but a range that can be expanded based upon the carrying capacity and particulars of a given place. [5] Along with 14 other simple but profound prerequisites in the Challenge. For more info see www.cascadiagbc.org/lbc

Second Quarter 2009

within a density that allows urbanity without crowding out our connection to the natural world and diminishing our connections to each other and the scale of place. As outdated structures are torn down, or as better infill development occurs, we must replace them with alternatives that adhere to saner height and density guidelines. This will more likely result in ideal ecological, cultural and sociological performance. If we succeed, our future cities will be built to last, supporting us as well as they support themselves. And there is no sweeter spot than that. jason f. mclennan is the CEO of the Cascadia Region Green Building Council. He is the creator of the Living Building Challenge, as well as the author of three books, including The Philosophy of Sustainable Design.

[6] Just think of mega projects like the Three Gorges Dam, or nuclear reactors that supply huge amounts of energy. [7] It also lends itself to greater social equity, as large mega-projects tend to concentrate wealth whereas decentralized infrastructure keeps wealth distributed among more individuals. [8] Known as place legibility [9] Is that approaching person from our tribe or another tribe? [10] http://uwnews.washington.edu/ni/article.asp?articleID=8228 [11] And only in the past century have we had the technological ability to do so with modern steel, the elevator, modern plumbing and air conditioning to enable the jump in height.

Moving Upstream: Progress in the Bioregion and beyond

Cascadia announces creation of the International Living Building Institute (ILBI)

Three years down the road from the launch of the Living Building Challenge™, a non-profit organization devoted to the global development of the standard has been created—the International Living Building Institute (ILBI). Its creation is a response to the increased demand for and interest in the Challenge and will help to disseminate its message and tools on a global scale. Announced at Living Future 2009, ILBI will become its own entity in 2010; in the meantime, Cascadia will manage the Institute. Learn more

First Living Building candidates step up to bat The Omega Center for Sustainable Living in Rheinbeck, NY and Tyson Living Learning Center

in Eureka, MO will be the first Living Building Challenge hopefuls to complete construction (May 2009). They will then enter the year-long period of occupancy and operation, after which they must prove they’ve met the requirements of each petal.

AIA/COTE picks its 2009 Top Ten Green Projects

Update: Code is cracked on barriers to the Living Building Challenge

In partnership with the City of Vancouver, WA and Clark County, WA, Cascadia released a study in April that identifies and addresses code and regulatory barriers to the Living Building Challenge for sustainable, affordable, residential development. The Code Study identified 6 green residential projects built or under development in the region that were assessed against Cascadia’s Living Building Challenge criteria. A detailed review of the case study projects against the city and county’s land use, development, and building codes was performed to highlight the potential obstacles projects may encounter. This project is funded through the Washington State Department of Community Trade & Economic Development. More Info

trim tab

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has named the year’s top ten examples of sustainable architecture and green design, selected by the AIA’s Committee on the Environment (COTE). Many of the new buildings have achieved LEED Platinum certification. The top buildings cover a range of uses, including a student center, a synagogue, apartment buildings, and large commercial buildings, and hail from six U.S. states—California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Texas, and Washington—as well as Victoria, British Columbia and Beirut, Lebanon. Learn about the projects

Recycling center to become first LEED industrial building in Alaska

Funding was recently secured for a community recycling center in Alaska’s Mat-su Borough, which will be built to achieve LEED-Gold, making it the first commercial/

industrial building in the great North to reach such standards, if achieved. The initial design goal is to eventually enable the building to transition to a net-zero energy, zero waste facility, though more financial resources will be required to accomplish this. Construction will begin summer 2009. Learn more about the project.

Vancouver aims high, shoots for the “greenest city in the world”

Vancouver’s eye is on the prize: to be the Greenest City on Earth by 2020, announced by Mayor Gregor Robertson in April. The recent release of “Urgent Quick Start Recommendations” by the city’s Greenest City Action Team (GCAT) proposed measures such as creating a priority permitting process for green buildings, making streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists, and creating an edible landscaping policy. Read GCAT’s complete report

Vancouver city council unanimously voted in favor to change city bylaws to legalize keeping chickens in urban backyards. The city joins its bioregional neighbors Portland and Seattle as chicken-friendly zones.

Update: Efficiency First! legislation becomes law in Washington

In March, the Washington State Legislature approved the Efficiency First! bill and Gov. Chris Gregoire signed it into law. The bill will help spur Washington’s economy and make it a clean energy leader by promoting super-efficient, lowenergy-use building codes, requiring disclosure of buildings’ energy use scores to prospective buyers, and make public buildings models of energy efficiency. More info

Oregon wanders down the path to net zero

New tools for passive design to help Vancouver achieve GHG emission reduction targets

Vancouver city council unanimously adopted a Passive Design Program, consisting of a passive design toolkit for homes and one for comprehensive projects—a significant step in achieving the city’s carbon reduction goals. The toolkits detail strategies for achieving energy efficiency and improved heating comfort through building design. The move signals that the city recognizes it takes more than green building codes to achieve sustainable architecture and is committed to taking significant steps toward sustainable development. Learn more

Vancouver’s backyards are turning into urban farmyards

A vegetable patch at Vancouver’s City Hall will bring the city closer to its commitment of 2,010 community garden plots by 2010, as well as help the city really walk the talk of sustainability., city officials believe. The idea was the first “Quick Start” recommendation made by the city’s Greenest City Action Team. This plot joins the 1600 others already planted on both public and private land around the city. More info If edible urban flora isn’t enough, VanCity dwellers can now co-dwell with (edible) fauna—chickens. In March,

Second Quarter 2009

Energy Trust of Oregon, Inc., a non-profit dedicated to promoting energy efficiency and clean renewable energy in Oregon, launched a “Path to Net Zero” pilot for owners who construct non-residential buildings with exceptional energy performance and strive for net zero on-site energy use. Eligible new construction and major renovation projects will receive enhanced design and technical assistance, as well as premium cash incentives. More info

Greywater gets the green thumbs up in Oregon

Commercial and residential buildings in Oregon are now allowed to use rainwater and greywater, putting the state in the top national tier of progressive water regulations. The report Achieving Water Independence in Buildings, initiated by affordable housing non-profit Central City Concern and supported by a host of green building heavy-hitters, including Cascadia, greatly influenced both the Oregon House of Representatives and Senate to give the thumbs up to House Bill 2080. The bill establishes a definition for greywater, encourages the appropriate reuse of greywater, and instructs the State DEQ to establish a permit for greywater use and disposal outside of buildings. The bill now awaits signing by Governor Kulongoski to become law. More Info

Massachusetts stretch code to cause a shrink in energy thanks to NBI Core Performance standard

The Massachusetts Board of Building Regulations and Standards voted to adopt a stretch energy code for the state that would make new commercial buildings under 100,000 square feet up to 30% more energy efficient than base standards and reduce carbon emissions by nearly 40%. The standard is based on a protocol developed by Washington-based New Buildings Institute (NBI) called Core Performance, which enables high performance building without the need for modeling. More info

making progress? Do you have a lead on cutting-edge green building progress in the region? Contact jenny@cascadiagbc.org and put “Moving Upstream News Lead” in the subject line.

Product Spotlight: Curious about building products’ social and ecological footprints? Use Cascadia’s Building Materials Questionnaire to start a dialogue about the potentially hidden impacts of product specification beyond typical metrics of cost, performance and aesthetics. For each issue of Trim Tab, we select an excerpt from a completed survey to highlight a product of interest.

Leap, Think, Amia, Siento - Seating Manufacturer:

Steelcase, Inc

Any substances on the US EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory released during

Not answered

Manufacturing location:

production?

Grand Rapids, MI (and High Point, NC for Siento)

Biodegradable or recyclable with the current available programs and

Yes, recyclable

Source location(s) for raw materials:

technologies?

Not answered

Percentage of final product weight

Completed a Life Cycle Assessment?

from:

Yes, with the University of Michigan’s Center for Sustainable Systems

Post-consumer recycled content?

33% Post-industrial recycled content?

Any persistent Organic Pollutants,

Very High Hazard Chemicals, High Hazard Chemicals or Highly Acute Toxicants [>0.1% by weight]?

Manufacturing practices consistent with Canadian and/or US labor standards?

Yes

Read Steelcase, Inc.’s entire social equity policy and review other completed Building Materials Questionnaires by visiting www.ilbi.org > Resources > Research > Building Material Questionnaires Blank questionnaires can also be downloaded for use or distribution. All returned forms will be included in a public online database.

trim tab

Book Review: B Y K IRA G O ULD

Stepping Toward Integrated Design:

A Book Review of Integrated Design: Mithun

Integrated design is a buzz-word these days, but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s also something that architects have long recognized as valuable. Firms saw value in having urban designers, planners, interior designers, landscape architects, and engineers on staff because it enriched the process and the service offerings to clients. But business models followed educational ones, for the most part, keeping disciplines in separate silos. Many factors have urged the industry towards greater integration, which usually means architects and consultants working closer together from early in the process. The sustainable design movement has stressed the value and need for this approach. Yet even progressive leaders in this area have been slow to expand and include disciplines farther afield, such as sociologists and hydrologists. Even firms that have found ways to engage more deeply and productively with clients, stakeholders, and multiple disciplines within still often struggle to effectively engage outside consultants throughout the process. Mithun, a firm highlighted in the first of Ecotone Publishingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new series Integrated Design, has made good on the promise of integrated design, but their example may represent the beginning of the journey, not its end. In many ways, Integrated Design: Mithun (2008), authored by David R. Macaulay, is what a monograph should be. (Perhaps especially if one doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t think of other

Second Quarter 2009

architects—who might prefer a greater proportion of fullbleed photography—as the primary audience.) This book is the Mithun story, framed by its seven eloquent principles: Grow an Idea, Expand the Boundaries, Use Nature as a Guide, Create Beauty and Spirit, Do the Math, Strengthen Community, and Bring Passion, Leave Ego. It is illustrated by nine case studies, including REI’s flagship store, the firm’s Seattle office at Pier 56, the award-winning Lloyd Crossing plan, and IslandWood School, plus references to other projects. It is an elegant, yet substantial book with solid photography and a good mix of other media. The well-organized text tells the firm’s story from its founding by Omer Mithun in Bellevue, Washington in 1949. The story is rich with voices of Mithun team members (Mithunees); author Macaulay knows when to let their words do the work and yet doesn’t yield his responsibility to narrative and flow. Mithun is a firm whose work, people, and workplace are imbued with the spirit and sensibility of its home region, the Pacific Northwest; hearing this from them can be powerful. For other firms looking to learn about nurturing a strong culture, the monograph touches on the firm’s commitment to education, mentoring, and having fun. For many architects, the enormity of climate change has prompted a focus on building elements that relate to energy efficiencies. A more holistic perspective is critical, and this can make the work the architect and allied professions amazingly complex. But as Yale Professor Michelle Addington has reminded us eloquently (most recently in “Harvard Design” magazine), no building is an island. Mithun’s own principles seem to remind their teams of this reality, and it results in special projects, such as the firm’s BuildCarbonNeutral.org web tool and its Climate Partnership, in which the firm shares with staff the cost of personal climate protection actions. I was gratified to see consultant teams listed in this volume, but disappointed to find them in the back. Crediting these firms with the project stories would have helped celebrate their roles. In the mix of the rich stories of the firm’s growth and its diverse projects, I appreciated the client voices where they surfaced, but wished there were a bit more evidence of the consultants. We’ve all heard stories about the unexpected benefits of deeply integrated teams, and more voice from the consultants could have served to better support this.

Photographs by Juan Hernandez, Mithun

In this telling, there could also have been a greater supply of “lessons learned.” There is always keen interest to know what teams would have done differently, and there must be many lessons learned in this collection of completed and conceptual projects. Good reasons often keep such laundry out of monographs, but airing it is what the profession needs, even if project teams and clients may prefer otherwise. This speaks to a conundrum that Mithun has created for itself. The firm is clearly committed to excellence and to integrated design as the path to reaching that result with clients and communities. But in celebrating its principles and sharing glimpses of its process, we are left wanting even more—more about the details of the process, especially what didn’t work. Firms that can help themselves and the profession learn more from every project may be the next wave of true progressives.

Writer Kira Gould, Assoc. AIA, LEED AP, is Director of Communications for the architecture, community design, and consulting firm of William McDonough + Partners. She is co-author, with Lance Hosey, of Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design (Ecotone Publishing, 2007). She has written for Metropolis magazine and other publications, and has lectured widely. She was the 2007 chair of the AIA Committee on the Environment.

trim tab

Event Calendar: June–September 2009

USGBC and CaGBC LEED Workshops, Hosted by Cascadia Region Green Building Council Green Building Operations & Maintenance: The LEED Implementation Process Seattle, WA – 7/24 Portland, OR - 3rd week of August

LEED® Canada-NC 1.1 Technical Review Workshop Vancouver, BC – 6/23 LEED Canada-CI 1.0 Technical Review Workshop Kelowna, BC - 9/23

Transformational Lecture Series Guy Battle

Portland, OR – 6/24 Seattle, WA – 6/25

Other Events Canada Green Building Council National Summit Montreal, Quebec – 6/9-11 Green Broker 2009 Seattle, WA - 9/17 Green Skyline Tours

Workshops Presented by Cascadia

Throughout British Columbia - 9/25 and 9/27

Build it LEED for Contractors Everett, WA – 7/23 Green Building and the Building Code Hood River, OR - 9/22 Hillsboro/PDX Metro - 9/23

Workshops, lectures and other opportunities throughout the bioregion For complete details, please visit our calendar at www.cascadiagbc.org/calendar

Second Quarter 2009

A decade of transformational leadership. A future of infinite possibility.

Cascadia thanks our Friends and asks you to join us in creating a living future.

LIVING

City of Seattle Department of Planning & Development

PLATINUM

GOLD

SILVER

CERTIFIED

www.cascadiagbc.org

trim tab

Cascadia promotes the design, construction and operation of buildings in Alaska, British Columbia, Washington and Oregon that are environmentally responsible, profitable and healthy places 41 to live, work and learn.

FORWARD TO FRIENDS:

LIKE WHAT YOU SEE?

Forward this to a friend and have them sign up for Trim Tab ADVERTISE:

WANT TO REACH NEARLY 20,000 LEADING PRACTITIONERS? Contact us to advertise in the next issue!

Second Quarter 2009