Nature Conservancy, Anonymous Posts and Demolition

One of the first posts I made to this blog (May 2, 2008) was about the Indianapolis chapter of the Nature Conservancy building their new state headquarters. A newspaper story at the time quoted the state director as saying. "We're an international conservation organization. If anyone should be walking the walk of sustainability it should be The Nature Conservancy." But the Nature Conservancy's version of "walking the walk" is tearing down an 19th Century warehouse building so that they could build a new, LEED certified green gizmo building.

Here is the building they claimed they couldn't rehabilitate.You know those awe inspiring before and after pictures of historic rehabilitation projects? Well the picture above is the "before", here's the Nature Conservancy's "after".

A couple of weeks ago I got two comments, obviously written by the same person, who said they were "a person that [sic] is very familiar with this project". The poster said there was a "consensus" to tear the building down. Since there were numerous preservationists in Indianapolis who tried to assist the Nature Conservancy in figuring out how to reuse the historic building, I guess the "consensus" was among those already committed to demolition.

In response to my comment that another historic warehouse building in Indianapolis of about the same size was being rehabilitated for less than half the cost of the Nature Conservancy structure AND was going to be LEED certified the poster said, "Did you ever bother to ask what the building that is spending $68/s.f. is actually trying to obtain from LEED? I guarantee it is not LEED Platinum." So here we go, a prepubescent 5th grade playground mentality, "Your LEED is only Gold. Mine is Platinum." The idiocy of stars on spelling tests.

You are certainly welcome to go back to the earlier entry and read the comments that were posted in their entirety. I have the integrity to allow such comments to be posted. The writer of this one, however, had neither the integrity nor the balls to use their own name and posted as "Anonymous." Quite a bit of courage that takes.

But don't despair, the historic warehouse remains. Here it is.

So, congratulations, Nature Conservancy. You not only are going to get a Platinum Plaque for your Porch from LEED. I'm also awarding you a Titanium Triangle for lacking the imagination of how to use a century old building which would have been the ultimate in recycling.

For those of you who contribute to environmental causes - pick someone else. The hypocritical and disingenuous Nature Conservancy doesn't understand what sustainable development really is.

Beyond waterless toilets and LEED Gold

Don't get me wrong. I'm happy that LEED exists. It is an excellent first shot at trying to make buildings and neighborhoods more environmentally responsible.

But to say that LEED is necessary but not sufficient for sustainable development is no different than saying dentistry is necessary but not sufficient for health care. But my other two dissents from LEED-mania are: 1) LEED only deals with the environmental component of sustainable development, not at all with the other two components -- economic responsibility and social/cultural responsibility; and 2) even within the environmental responsibility component of sustainable development the contributions of existing buildings is irresponsibly inadequate on multiple levels.

So that's it. That's my beef with LEED.

Having said that, recently I've been a bit surprised, but more than that extraordinarily pleased to find that there are some within what might be considered the hard core environmental movement who understand that as well.

One is Lloyd Alter a Canadian architect and developer, and now active web journalist for Tree Hugger.com. Here is someone deeply committed to sustainable development, but also sees the irreplaceable role that heritage buildings play in sustainable development. He frequent writes an entry on Tree Hugger entitled "Another One Bites the Dust" that is well worth reading.

Another "green" blog that understands the historic preservation/sustainable development link is GreenRedux.com.

When the discussion of sustainable development moves beyond the techno talk from "green architects" and gizmo salesmen and broadens so that all of the components of sustainable development are part of the discussion, we'll be making progress. Those who remain stuck on the inane "can I get two extra points toward Leed Gold if we put in a bike rack?" are only demonstrating their absolute ignorance about what sustainable development is.

For those with time to kill you might want to look at the podcast interview I did with Lloyd Atler in Collingwood, Ontario recently.

LEED and Lunacy in Lexington

You all know about LEED, the acronym for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, the checklist process where so-called "green architects" and their allies in the building materials, construction and real estate fields can go about getting certified. It's the equivalent of getting those gold and silver stars in the 4th grade for perfect attendance or sitting quietly at your desk during rest time, or maybe for a perfect spelling text.

Well, LEED certification does have its merits, and when it seems we all need some plaque to hang on the wall, maybe this makes some sense.

But too often I'm reaching the conclusion that the acronym for LEED really means, "Lunatic Environmentalists Enthusiastically Demolishing." I had written earlier (May 2, 2008) about the outrageous mendacity of the Nature Conservancy saying it wasn't feasible to renovate a hundred year old warehouse in Indianapolis as an excuse to raze it and build a suburbanesque green-gizmo building instead.

This pattern of using LEED certification as the club to demolish historic buildings is becoming more and more common.

At this writing, in Lexington, Kentucky, a proposal is rapidly moving forward to build a 40-story hotel in the middle of downtown.

And to do this the developers say it will be necessary to tear down 14 historic structures built between 1826 and 1930.

Preservationists have responded that they certainly don't object to a new hotel downtown, but that there is no reason the historic structures couldn't be incorporated into the development. "Not possible," says the developer. But look at the site!

The idea that this development couldn't be a mix of old and new suffers from a paucity of the imagination.

And their stick to justify the demolition? "Yeah, but we're going to be LEED certified."

Oh, and by the way, as a reward for destroying the history of Lexington, the developers are to be rewarded with $80 million of Tax Increment Financing.

The Blue Grass Trust and Preservation Lexington are leading the effort against this idiocy. The National Trust has also noted this project in the online edition of Preservation Magazine.

But it's a tough battle. Why? Because of an increasingly common formula:

LEED + GREED = Loss of our built cultural heritage.

Tip of the Day - Look at the drawing of the proposed hotel above. Here's a sure sign that the architect and the developer are either egocentrically oblivious of the context of their proposed development or (more likely) indifferent to it. The elevations show only the building itself, none of its surroundings. ALWAYS be worried when there is no context shown - 99 times out of a hundred it means the building is vastly out of scale and alien to its context.