USGBC headquarters gets LEED platinum - is this enough bling?
The U.S. Green Building Council sent out a press release this morning announcing that its headquarters in Washington, D.C., has been certified LEED platinum under the new version of LEED. It also sent out a whole powerpoint presentation of photos, which gave the viewer a pretty good idea of what the space looks like.
But before I show you the eye candy, please stop and take a moment to think about what you think the headquarters should look like. First, it is important to know that the USGBC is the creator of LEED, the environmental rating system which has produced some really innovative and exciting pieces of green architecture. So it stands to reason that their building should be the epitome of everything green that it possibly can. Second, it’s also important to understand the building’s context before you judge it. The office is 75,000 square feet that is divided between two floors and connected by an open staircase. It’s also in an urban area, so realistically, this building was going to look like an office building from the outside.
Here’s what Rick Fedrizzi said he wanted it to be: “The vision of the space was to exemplify everything a LEED building is: high-performing, resource-efficient, healthy and productive.”
Alright. Look at the photos below and tell me: did they suceed? Is this how you imagined it would look? If so, what did they get right? If not, what would you have done differently?
So readers, what do you think?
Tags: Architecture, LEED, project photos, Projects, USGBC
Loading ...
July 20th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
yawn.
ok, it’s green. congrats to the folks @ perkins + will. but it’s got no soul.
btw, usgbc has become quite the racket.
109,000 people registered to take the LEED v2.2 exam between march and june. nice $32,700,000 bonus.
July 21st, 2009 at 7:42 am
All that glazing and the lights are still on…everywhere! May be for the sake of the photograph, but contradicts the intent of sustainable design. Either need to retrain the end-user of the use of lighting, or work with photographers to better capture the essence of sustainable design and communicate that message visually.
July 21st, 2009 at 11:21 am
well if its like many LEED buildings it will be highly inefficient and have many flaws. Just the glazing and thermal breaks alone makes me wonder.
LEED really is a joke. All those “LEED AP’s” better review their liability insurance. I see a great deal of litigation in the future with regards to the “promises” of LEED.
July 21st, 2009 at 1:08 pm
I wonder how long of a wait it took for them to get their review done?
July 21st, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Well, I’ll go against the grain here. I think it *looks* like a nice office environment. I’m sure they wanted a Platinum building that looked like a “grown-ups” office not a hippy-commune. That seems to be the image the USGBC wants to project.
I’ll have to dig into to the case studies a bit more to decide on my own how green it really is, but for now I’ll offer my congrats to USGBC.
July 21st, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Interesting opinions here. Holz - if it’s got no soul, what do you think is an example of a current green building that does have soul? And is it LEED platinum? Or shooting for living building? Or just well designed?
Anonymous 1 - You’ve got a great point. Even if the lights are for the photograph, having them all on does not let the viewer see how the natural light actually works in the space (the TV, by the way, is also on). And seems a bit contradictory.
Anonymous 2 - the liabilities of green building is one of my greatest areas of interest. If you’re interested in talking, you should email me at katiez@djc.com.
JP - that’s an excellent question. I’m guessing here that it was probably a quick turnaround.
Nate - I’m not disagreeing that it looks like a nice office environment, but I’ve seen “grown-up” offices that push the envelope more aesthetically without looking like a hippy compound. The question, I suppose, becomes what is LEED supposed to support aesthetically. Is LEED about creating a building that is really green and looks like everything else? Or is it about creating something that is really green… and looks different? I can’t answer that one.
July 22nd, 2009 at 9:17 am
I’d like to see what they have done on the exterior of the building and in the surrounding streetscape. As a site engineer, one of my chief complaints in that a building can achive platinum status without giving much thought to the buildings exterior and the stormwater that falls on it and how it interacts with the rest of the community. I’m curious to see if this is the case here or if they also greened the exterior?
July 22nd, 2009 at 9:50 am
Don’t get me wrong, my favorite green building is the CK Choi building at UBC, with composting toilets, natural ventilation, and no heating plant. My point was that USGBCs goal seems to be to bring green to the mainstream, and thus it is not surprising that they wanted their office building to look like a traditional office building.
August 1st, 2009 at 6:32 pm
I think people misunderstand the LEED Headquarters building. It’s not brand new; it’s a renovation of an existing building from 1975.
And they only take up two of the ten floors in the existing structure.
And it was a LEED CI certification (94 points out of 110 for Platinum), with few opportunities for sitework. But because of the careful site selection, the project earned 18 points for the Sustainable Sites section.