The Spirit Of The Law--Is Baltimore's Proposed 25th Street Station Green?

In 2009, Baltimore passed an amedment to its building code requiring public and private buildings above 10,000 gross square feet to "be equivalent to a LEED “Silver” level."  Obviously, the goal was to get buildings in Baltimore to be more environmentally friendly. Fast forward a year, and a controversy is brewing over whether a proposed Big Box project, including a Lowe's and a WalMart is actually green.  There is some rumbling that the project was not green because it was not being certified by the USGBC, and may not be properly managing its wastewater.  According to Baltidome:
 

During community testimony at the hearing, the Planning Commission was presented with concern that the developers were not applying for LEED “Silver” certification for the project and that the proposed development appears to be failing in its method for waste water management of the site. Despite the developer’s assertions, the project may, in fact, be ineligible for LEED “Silver” standards set by the city.

Without deeply analyzing the nicities of wastewater management, the resistance to the 25th street station project appears to be mainly one of local vs. chain.  But I am wrestling with the more baasic regulatory concept of incentivizing inner city development because it is green, even if it does not embrace green building practices.

Work with me here.  Cities are inherently green.  One of my favorite New Yorker articles of all time was David Owen's 2004  piece on why New York City is sustainable.  The argument for 25th Street Station's green cred goes like this "If the 25th Street Walmart project comes to fruition, your average Baltimorean will have greater access to retail within walking or short driving distance.  No need to go to the suburbs to shop, wasting fossil fuel and requiring expensive additional infrastructure.  In addition, it provides an amenity which makes inner city living more attractive."  Weighed against that, of course, is the long distance shipping of goods to WalMart, and potentially the non-green siting and construction practices. But the non-green practices and the long distance shipping would exist wherever WalMart built, in downtown Baltimore or in an exurban location. 

Baltidome is rightly concerned that Baltimore's green building regulations are not being enforced, and there is currently considerable stress on municipal budgets which are leading to green building programs being scaled back.  Are we better off, in an era of severly constrained municipal finances, focusing on incentivizing urban development and renewal than specifying (and enforcing) green building practices?  

Message to Smart Developers--Plan Now For Environmental And Fiscal Returns Later

Guest Post: Seth Shapiro, Director of Planning and Urban Design, Barton Partners

So, just as green building approaches mainstream acceptance, the economy tanks. Does this mean that the environment will once again have to take a back seat?  The answer is an emphatic no.   While the building construction and development industries are indeed in for some pain (for those who peddled unsustainable development, deservedly so) the current downturn provides for an opportunity to address some land planning and urban design issues, especially as they relate to sustainable design.

I have often been skeptical of green building as a panacea, especially independent of specific land use policy reform. Selling a building as “green”, even as it continues the development patterns associated with sprawl, is utterly ridiculous. With the release of LEED ND, the USGBC goes a long way in addressing this issue. But I wonder if it goes far enough. What if no building could be LEED certified (Homes, NC, Retail, etc) if it did not achieve at least a minimum of a LEED ND certification as a perquisite?

 

Clearly, this pause in building activity is the right time to address how we can redevelop the sub- and ex-urbs in a more sustainable fashion. Thankfully, this is exactly what seems to be occurring, independent of any greatly needed government stimulus or public policy shift.

 

At BartonPartners, where I serve as the Director of Planning and Urban Design, the projects that are making their way to my desk almost exclusively involve repositioning conventionally designed suburban projects for a more sustainable, and often mixed use future (usually independent of existing zoning regulations). Whether these projects eventually achieve a LEED certification or another green building designation is somewhat irrelevant as they, by there very location within already developed areas and often adjacent to transit infrastructure, are being repositioned in more sustainable patterns for future markets.

 

Indeed, the smartest of our developer clients are investing small sums of money now in specific project planning and urban design studies. In today’s environment, entitlement may be 12 to 18 months down the road anyway, especially in more established communities. While full architectural services are out of reach for many developers and property owners in this economic climate, up front urban design services, which are a fraction of standard architectural fees, can go a long way to position the smart projects for the future upturn in real estate, whether that be in early 2010 or (sigh) beyond.