What Seattle code issues stop you from building green(er)?
When I'm out in the field at forums and talks, I hear over and over that the construction and design community wants to build sustainable projects, but Seattle's code prevents them from really pushing the envelope. But rarely does a talk go into the specifics of what exactly needs to change.
So here's my challenge for you: answer what exactly needs to change and how. I want to know what general issues are problematic, how code makes it difficult to build green or incorporate green features, and what you would change to make the process easier. I welcome personal experiences and third-party stories, comparisons working in other jurisdictions or just ideas. It can be about residential, office, mixed-use, etc. I'd also welcome comments from areas outside Seattle (or Washington for that matter).
What's the biggest hurdle? It it soil issues, gray water or water rights? Is it related to density or materials?
Conversely, is there anything Seattle recently did to make life (and projects) a whole lot easier?
Post your thoughts and experience. You never know who could be listening......
DJC Green Building Blog
Welcome to the Daily Journal of Commerce Green Building Blog. Our focus is on green building issues in Seattle, the Pacific Northwest and anywhere that might interest you. If you have any comments or questions, please email maudes@djc.com.
Opinions expressed by bloggers are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce.
Polls
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.Recent Posts
- Your patio can also be a power plant
- Living Future a Deep Dive into What’s Possible…and Necessary, says Noted Paul Hawken
- House gets a deep green remodel for $150 a square foot
- When it comes to certified wood, GSA is right to question LEED
- Is it time for Seattle to embrace graffiti?
Recent Comments
- Chantal on 5 tips to improve home energy efficiency
- Jayne on 5 tips to improve home energy efficiency
- Washington, D.C’s Green Building Act: What it Is and What it Could Mean for the Future of Construction | Viridian Wood Products on What can we learn from D.C.’s green building law?
- Less energy: Seattle Green Home Tour 2013 | LD Arch Design on House gets a deep green remodel for $150 a square foot
- There isn’t anything better coming along. | O'Brien & Company on Crunch the numbers and preservation wins
Energy information
- BetterBricks
- Earth Advantage Blog
- New Buildings Institute Blog
- Washington State University Extension Energy Program
Green blogs
- Best Green Blogs
- Building Capacity Blog
- Building Seattle Green Blog
- City Tank
- Climate Solutions
- Earth Advantage Blog
- GreenbuildingsNYC
- GreenFab News and Media
- Greenversations
- Inhabitat
- Jetson Green
- Landscape and Urbanism
- Metaefficient
- New Buildings Institute Blog
- Portland Architecture
- SeattleScape
- The Greenworkplace
- Thinkspace
Green Building organizations
- Built Green
- Cascadia Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council
- City of Seattle Green Building
- City of Seattle Green Building Program
- DJC.com
- Environmental Services Directory for Washington State
- Green Infrastructure Wiki
- King County GreenTools
- Lifecycle Building Challenge
- Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Resources
- Puget Sound Partnership
- Seattle Great City Initiative
- Whole Building Design Guide
Green events in the Seattle area
- AIA Seattle
- Cascadia Green Building Council Events Calendar
- Master Builders of King and Shohomish County Built Green Events Calendar and News
- Seattle Department of Planning and Development Events
March 25th, 2008 - 16:23
There are a bunch of areas that could make it easier: 1) density (FAR) bonuses for defined green building commitments; 2) waiver of sales tax on green expenditures; 3) change state, county and city laws to allow for on-site cisterns and water re-use, which I believe is technically illegal at the present time; 4) tax credits for higher cost green elements, such as photovoltaic arrays, green roofs, etc…; and 5) a dedicated green permitting person at DPD who can help expedite permitting and coordinate the attainment of available incentives and credits.
March 25th, 2008 - 16:24
Hi Katie,
My wife and I are building a studio for my sculpture and her painting. At only 2,300sf it is small, but should be quite green. We have run into no particular difficulties in either permitting or construction. The stormwater detention almost became an issue because I wanted a different design than what the City of Seattle typically approves, but I drew out my idea and a couple days later it was accepted, with a minor tweak.
I had to educate my concrete guy to use an ICF form for the foundation stemwalls so that there would not be any form trash, and probably paid a little extra to educate him. So far we have not made a single dump run, and our site is cleaner now than when we started, since most construction suppliers seem to be on board with using recyclable packaging, if any.
Our green mechanicals were planned early. They have cost more than standard, but we had no extra issues with permitting. The inspector has been grumpy, but we all have bad days. I would gladly do it all again.
March 26th, 2008 - 09:11
I believe the city needs to either:
a. terminate its design review process,
or
b. overhaul it to focus on sound urban planning and sustainable principles.
When you are a small company, so much of our resources have to go into these types of unnecessary or unneeded hurdles (design review boards) that we could instead be spending on researching, devising and incorporating green features.
Our design review boards typically have tried to unwittingly change our course on durable (i.e. sustainable) materials because they are so conditioned to EIFS, hardi and other entirely inadequate systems (as an example).
If the boards had made better architecture happen in Seattle, I think it would be worthy to “tweak” them- but take an honest assessment of our mixed use buildings and, well, that is not energy well spent- quite the contrary.