Edith Green/Wendell Wyatt Federal Building Renovation | Complete

[MarkDaMan]

Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 1:17pm PDT | Modified: Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 1:35pm
GSA Stimulus list: $149M for Portland
Portland Business Journal

General Services Administration plans to spend more than $149 million of its stimulus funding for government buildings on three projects in Oregon.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, signed by President Barack Obama in February, calls for major new construction and energy efficient modernization of federal office buildings, courthouses and land ports across the country. Of the total $5.5 billion, GSA is planning to put $4.27 billion toward “high performance green building” modernization and improvement.

The Oregon projects:

• Portland’s Edith-Green Wendell Wyatt Federal Building, 1220 S.W. Third Ave., will receive $133 million. The building is named in honor of former Oregon U.S. Representatives Edith Green and Wendell Wyatt.

• Portland’s Bonneville Power Administration Building, 905 N.E. 11th Ave., $6.6 million.

• The David J. Wheeler Federal Building in Baker, $9.8 million.

The list of projects was first obtained earlier this week by the Washington Business Journal, an affiliated publication of Portland Business Journal. Click the link for a list of all GSA projects, as submitted to Congress.

http://portland.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2009/03/30/daily35.html?ed=2009-04-01&ana=e_du_pub

[MarkDaMan]

$133 million

That is a TON of money for one building renovation. Does this mean the project will start in the next few months?

[NJD]

^ longer the name of a building: the costlier to renovate.

[MarkDaMan]

From SERA Architects webpage, no renderings though...

Edith Green/Wendall Wyatt Federal Building

location
portland, oregon
completed
on-the-boards
size
303,574 sq ft


Edith Green/Wendall Wyatt Federal Building

The U.S. General Services Administration (“GSA”) has initiated, per Congressional authorization, the Edith Green Wendell Wyatt Federal Building Renovation & Rehabilitation Project. This project is currently in the planning and design phase.

The Edith Green Wendell Wyatt Federal Building is considered by many to be the flagship building for the federal government in Portland, Oregon, and is located in the central business district. The building complex is comprised of an eighteen-story office tower, which occupies one full city block and two levels of basement and parking areas. The overall development encompasses approximately 516,360 square feet.

Various federal agencies occupy tenant space within the Federal Building. In late 2001, GSA surveyed the client agencies to ascertain their needs, and commissioned a report to propose building solutions which would better support current and projected tenant requirements. The results of these findings led to GSA’s approval to proceed with this project.

Goals of the project are to improve the functionality of and security for the Federal Building, as well as extend its useful life, improve its seismic capabilities and provide better systems efficiency - all in an environmentally positive manner. The proposed rehabilitation and renovation work will permit the re-introduction of the building into the market as an effectively new and sustainable building.

The primary area of focus is the transformation of the tower to provide for the building’s principal function as office space for the federal client agencies. The building renovation responds to various areas where there is a desire for improvement.

The current project schedule calls for start of construction in FY2007/2008. The duration of the entire project is expected to be about five years.

For this project, GSA has contracted with SERA Architects (Portland, OR) and Cutler Anderson Architects (Bainbridge Island, WA) for architectural and design services. Other private sector companies have also been engaged to ensure a successful project.

For further information on this project, contact: Peter Gray, Community Affairs Public Outreach U.S. General Services Administration – Northwest/Arctic Region Peter.Gray@gsa.gov

http://www.serapdx.com/project.php?category=12&project=104

[philopdx]

New cladding would be absolutely marvelous.

[PacificNW]

I had read somewhere that the building would get a new skin....one can hope.

[nobody]

Anyone have a current image of this building?

[MarkDaMan]

in all her glory

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Edith_Green_-_Wendell_Wyatt_Federal_Building.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Edith_Green_-_Wendell_Wyatt_Federal_Building.jpg

[urbanlife]

and here I thought I would be turning 80 by the time this tower went under renovation.

Good to hear it will be happening sooner. I cant remember where now, but I know I have seen a rendering of what the tower would look like...though I dont think it was a very detailed rendering.

[stan]

Um, the picture is a little hard to take on a full stomach.

[scottyboi]

yikes...that's a whole LOT of ugly...as a whole, we seem have a lot of buildings similar to this downtown...unfortunate

[zilfondel]

I had read somewhere that the building would get a new skin....one can hope.

I had an inside source and mentioned it a year or two ago. Took 'em awhile to get to it. $133 million... I wonder if I'll recognize the building once they're done.

So it looks like they're going to do a complete interior reconstruction, new circulation, make it LEED, building systems, as well as put a new cladding system on it, which from what I was told will involve a double glass curtainwall (http://enr.construction.com/features/buildings/archives/030210.asp) on the southern facade. They also might just put a new glass curtain wall over the current facade, actually. I guess we'll find out, though.

[NewUrbanist]

Well I am sure for $133 Million they could have built a new tower, maybe not as tall, and sell this building to a private developer/ owner. Sometimes I just don't understand the GSA.

[PacificNW]

It looks as though the Federal Building "Updo" is going out for bid (July, 2009)! $133 million dollars worth! A new facade is part of the changes coming to this tired looking federal building. :cheers:

[Orlando]

Are there any renderings?

[urbanlife]

this actually going to happen within the coming years? I always thought I would make it to 60 before this happened.

[Okstate]

Anything that makes our skyline look better from the Willamette is good news.

[Mallory2008]

Fantastic news...IMO this is the ugliest building in the city (with Fugjoy a close second).

[scottyboi]

I don't know...there are plenty of fugly office buildings downtown...actually, most of them are pretty horrible 50's and 60's affairs...blocky, sterile and bland (not that I'm arguing that THIS building is ugly ;-) )

[360Rich]

I couldn't remember what this building looks like. If you're in the same boat, here's a pic.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Edith_Green_-_Wendell_Wyatt_Federal_Building.jpg

[pdxhome]

The Portland Building is much more ugly that this Federal Building...

[WonderlandPark]

This this Federal Building is much more ugly than the Portland Building ..

There, fixed it for ya

[rsbear]

I don't know...there are plenty of fugly office buildings downtown...actually, most of them are pretty horrible 50's...

So, without doing any research, boi, name some high-rise office buildings in downtown Portland built in the 50's.

[pdxhome]

There, fixed it for ya

You have to be joking?!?!

[urbanlife]

Surprised this is actually going to happen...though the down side is that it wont start construction for another year...which at first makes no sense, but then when I thought about it, the city has to move everyone out of the building for three years to renovate it...so there will be alot of office moving going on this summer.


Portland federal building due for big green makeover
by Harry Esteve, The Oregonian
Monday August 24, 2009, 6:05 PM

The homely, humongous Edith Green/Wendell Wyatt federal building in downtown Portland will be transformed into an environmental showpiece and become Oregon's single biggest federal stimulus project.

When it's done, the boxy, concrete-and-glass tower at Southwest Third and Jefferson will have a softer, sleeker, more modern look, according to an architect's drawing of the finished product. As a bonus, the 24-year-old windows won't leak and the building could qualify for "LEED" certification, an internationally recognized green seal of approval.

"We're looking at this as an opportunity to showcase how we can take an existing building and turn it into a high-performance green building," said Kevin Kampschroer, acting director of the environmental construction program for the General Services Administration in Washington, D.C.

The $133 million price tag puts it far ahead of any other stimulus-funded work in the state, and among the more expensive building redos in the nation. The closest in Oregon is a $33 million railroad track rehabilitation for the Port of Coos Bay, according to recovery.org, the Web site for a nonprofit that tracks stimulus projects.

The Green/Wyatt project is part of a broader Obama Administration plan to convert government buildings from massive resource wasters into certifiably energy- and water-efficient structures. More than $4 billion has been set aside for similar reconstruction projects around the country.

For Portland, the selection of the Green/Wyatt building hands the city another entry for its environmentally friendly portfolio, plus an economic boost from a major downtown project during a particularly stagnant time for construction.

"We're talking hundreds of workers," said Bob Shiprack, who represents the Oregon State Building and Construction Trades Council. "This is a total remodel. It's as far as you can go without knocking the whole building down."

The main hitch, says Shiprack, is the timeframe. Work isn't slated to start until about a year from now. "I don't know what the hold-up is on this." In the meantime, he said, "employment continues to decline in the building trades."

The Portland firm SERA Architects has been hired to take the lead on the project.

Initial plans to renovate the 18-story, 350,000-square-foot building were outlined three years ago, but never made it to the top of the government's funding priority list. That changed when Congress approved the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act -- the federal stimulus program.

The Portland project got the go-ahead because so much design work already had been finished, Kampschroer said.

Plans call for a new "skin" for the outside of the building, with each side receiving a different treatment to take advantage of natural light, heat and cooling. Protruding "fins" covered in vines and other vegetation will block heat in the summer and capture light in the winter. New double-glazed windows will take the place of the leaky, single-paned ones that are the source of tremendous energy loss, Kampschroer said.

The new structure will be designed not only to cut energy use dramatically, but also to resist earthquakes and, because it's a federal building, bomb blasts. At the same time, all electrical, plumbing and other mechanical systems will be replaced. Security systems also will be upgraded.

"This is a building that's had no major modernization since the mid-70s," Kampschroer said.

Building tenants -- including the IRS, the Veteran's Administration and U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, will be asked to vacate the building for up to three years while the work goes on.

Some may question such a lofty price tag for a renovation -- why not just start from scratch? For example, the smaller, 11-story Oregon Sustainability Center to be built at Portland State University is projected to cost $90 million.

Recycling existing buildings represents the new green ethic better than building new ones, said Jerry Yudelson, a green building consultant in Tucson, Ariz., who is familiar with Portland projects.

"Most of the energy savings that's going to happen in the next 10 years is going to come from existing buildings," Yudelson said. "It's a big movement. It's happening all over the country."

The building, named for two prominent Oregon members of Congress, generally gets low aesthetic marks. It's "representative of its era," Yudelson said.

Port of Portland director Bill Wyatt, son of one of the building's namesakes, said he's glad it's getting an update.

"It's an incredibly valuable piece of property," Wyatt said. Keeping it as a government building adheres to the original plan of a government complex in downtown. "It just makes a lot of sense to maintain what you've got."

-- Harry Esteve; harryesteve@news.oregonian.com

[IanofCascadia]

:previous: Is it possible they could be moving into First and Main... F & M gets a tenant for a couple years while the federal building is being renovated and the office market improves, while the building's current occupants only have to move a couple of blocks?

[Sioux612]

Looks like Sera is the firm (http://www.serapdx.com/project.php?category=1&project=104)

[urbanlife]

:previous: Is it possible they could be moving into First and Main... F & M gets a tenant for a couple years while the federal building is being renovated and the office market improves, while the building's current occupants only have to move a couple of blocks?

that sounds very likely.

[pylon]

Having this, a government building renovated to a greener standard, and the Oregon Sustainability Center's built-from-the-ground-up Living Building only a few blocks away should give visitors a one-stop-shopping opportunity to see the two main approaches to energy efficiency.

[MarkDaMan]

Actually most of the tenants in the Green/Wyatt building are moving into the Gus Solomon Courthouse, another government owned building. My little sister is a paralegal and her firm got moved out of there in anticipation of the new federal tenants.

[Sioux612]

Here is an older building that got a $100m+ renovation, for reference:

http://curbed.com/uploads/2009_3_330madison.jpg

[dintares]

Curiousity growing on which building this is?

[360Rich]

Curiousity growing on which building this is?

That's 330 Madison Ave in NYC.

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/vornado-beautify-330-madison-100-m

[maccoinnich]

I much prefer the International Style facade in the 'before' picture.

[Sioux612]

I finally got a reply from SERA and we'll be getting updated renderings of this project in Mid-December.

[PacificNW]

▲▲ Thanks.....I will be looking forward to the "new" look...

[PacificNW]

Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 1:59pm PST
McCain blasts Portland's biggest stimulus project
Portland Business Journal

Print Email Reprints RSS Feeds LinkedIn Share Comments
A new report by two Republican senators takes aim at the proposed $133 million renovation of the Edith Green/Wendell Wyatt federal building.

The report, by Sens. Don Coburn of Oklahoma and 2008 presidential candidate John McCain of Arizona questions the project’s entire scope.

“For $133 million, some may wonder why they did not simply tear it down and start over,” the senators wrote in a report released Wednesday.

The report named the project the second worst stimulus project funded by the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed in February.

The worst of 100 projects listed by Coburn and McCain is a $5 million energy retrofit of a “mostly empty mall” in Oak Ridge, Tenn.

The Wyatt/Green building earned the senators’ wrath for several reasons. A vegetative skin designed to lower heating and cooling costs isn’t yet proven to help insulate buildings. Plus a new federal building built in 2007, in San Francisco, featured the same energy efficiency features and cost $144 million. The buildings are both 18 stories while the San Francisco structure offers 100,000 square feet more in usable space, the senators noted.

Bids are expected to go out on the Wyatt/Green project this month.

[scleeb]

Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 1:59pm PST
McCain blasts Portland's biggest stimulus project
Portland Business Journal

Print Email Reprints RSS Feeds LinkedIn Share Comments
A new report by two Republican senators takes aim at the proposed $133 million renovation of the Edith Green/Wendell Wyatt federal building.

The report, by Sens. Don Coburn of Oklahoma and 2008 presidential candidate John McCain of Arizona questions the project’s entire scope.

“For $133 million, some may wonder why they did not simply tear it down and start over,” the senators wrote in a report released Wednesday.

The report named the project the second worst stimulus project funded by the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed in February.

The worst of 100 projects listed by Coburn and McCain is a $5 million energy retrofit of a “mostly empty mall” in Oak Ridge, Tenn.

The Wyatt/Green building earned the senators’ wrath for several reasons. A vegetative skin designed to lower heating and cooling costs isn’t yet proven to help insulate buildings. Plus a new federal building built in 2007, in San Francisco, featured the same energy efficiency features and cost $144 million. The buildings are both 18 stories while the San Francisco structure offers 100,000 square feet more in usable space, the senators noted.

Bids are expected to go out on the Wyatt/Green project this month.

I hate to admit it, but I think these Senators make a compelling point. From the day this project was announced I was wondering the same thing. The cost of new construction was at, or below, the proposed renovation cost. If the object it to go green, imagine the efficiencies and improvements that would be gained by starting from the ground up. I know the "greenest" building is the one that is already built, but this renovation seems like a missed opportunity to me.

[urbanlife]

I hate to admit it, but I think these Senators make a compelling point. From the day this project was announced I was wondering the same thing. The cost of new construction was at, or below, the proposed renovation cost. If the object it to go green, imagine the efficiencies and improvements that would be gained by starting from the ground up. I know the "greenest" building is the one that is already built, but this renovation seems like a missed opportunity to me.

Well McCain can go F* himself on this one. Granted he is from Arizona and tear down and start from the ground up is how they like to do it down there. From a structural standpoint there is nothing wrong with this building...but the envelope is basically a huge energy leak...not to mention most of the energy that the building uses is being consumed through its lights. None of these issues warrant the need to tear down and start over.

If they did start from ground up, the only right thing to do would be to recycle over 90% of the original building back into the new building which would make the final price tag much higher than this....then we would have to listen to old McCain crying about us wanting too much money. The way I see it, I vote for senators that try to bring federal money to my state, not turn it away.

[cab]

Never heard these two complain about the billion dollar embassy in Iraq. God forbid we spend money in our own country.

[scleeb]

Well McCain can go F* himself on this one. Granted he is from Arizona and tear down and start from the ground up is how they like to do it down there. From a structural standpoint there is nothing wrong with this building...but the envelope is basically a huge energy leak...not to mention most of the energy that the building uses is being consumed through its lights. None of these issues warrant the need to tear down and start over.

If they did start from ground up, the only right thing to do would be to recycle over 90% of the original building back into the new building which would make the final price tag much higher than this....then we would have to listen to old McCain crying about us wanting too much money. The way I see it, I vote for senators that try to bring federal money to my state, not turn it away.

Wow... McCain can go F* himself? Why exactly? It looks to me like he's doing his job. Why is it that so much vitriol has to be spewed over partisan labels? Ad hominem attacks are usually left to those without good counter-arguments. My original point was that McCain seemed to have a good point regarding the Highest and Best use of these stimulus funds. If you going to expend these types of dollars as part of the stimulus, why not get the best possible outcome? The San Francisco Federal Building cited in the article seems to be a good illustration of this line of thought. I’m not suggesting we do nothing. I’m suggesting we do it better.
Also, regarding you comment about “recycling 90%” of the building, you’ve totally misread the reality of what would happen in the event of new construction. This building would never be demolished. In actuality, the GSA would declare the EG/WW building to be “Surplus USG Property.” It would be appraised and sold at its fair market value, probably to a REIT. The GSA would then lease back its existing space until the new building is completed. The new Federal Building would undoubtedly be built with the highest seismic and LEED specifications (which the GSA requires), thereby meeting the original intent of current renovation.
What does Portland get under this approach? A CBD surface parking lot gets transformed into a standard-bearer building for efficient, new federal construction, as well as a new “property taxpaying” commercial office redevelopment opportunity in the form of the former EG/WW building. It makes sense to me. What am I missing here?

[Artist]

Is the seismic code the same for federal construction in San Francisco and Portland? I have my doubts. Which state, California or Oregon, builds for greater longevity? I don't think it is California. To compare the simple total cost of one fed building to the other, in such different locales, is naive at best and misleading at worst, and is not even relevant. Much better to compare the total cost of demolition and reconstruction to rehabbing. That was probably done for the Portland site. Does anyone have access to that cost comparison?

[urbanlife]

Wow... McCain can go F* himself? Why exactly? It looks to me like he's doing his job. Why is it that so much vitriol has to be spewed over partisan labels? Ad hominem attacks are usually left to those without good counter-arguments. My original point was that McCain seemed to have a good point regarding the Highest and Best use of these stimulus funds. If you going to expend these types of dollars as part of the stimulus, why not get the best possible outcome? The San Francisco Federal Building cited in the article seems to be a good illustration of this line of thought. I’m not suggesting we do nothing. I’m suggesting we do it better.
Also, regarding you comment about “recycling 90%” of the building, you’ve totally misread the reality of what would happen in the event of new construction. This building would never be demolished. In actuality, the GSA would declare the EG/WW building to be “Surplus USG Property.” It would be appraised and sold at its fair market value, probably to a REIT. The GSA would then lease back its existing space until the new building is completed. The new Federal Building would undoubtedly be built with the highest seismic and LEED specifications (which the GSA requires), thereby meeting the original intent of current renovation.
What does Portland get under this approach? A CBD surface parking lot gets transformed into a standard-bearer building for efficient, new federal construction, as well as a new “property taxpaying” commercial office redevelopment opportunity in the form of the former EG/WW building. It makes sense to me. What am I missing here?

Well my issues towards McCain go back for a while now of watching his actions as a senator. He is happy to not try to bring new money into his state, that is fine, but I am okay with our senators trying to bring money into this state.

Though I will agree, your approach does make sense, but the reason why I would like to see this building renovated than simply building a new building is because we need to start looking at our current crop of buildings and understand how each of them is wasting energy and fix those issues. Building a new energy efficient federal building while keeping this one would actually add to the energy consumption because you will still have the same problems with this building and a new building that also consumed its portion of energy, even it is is very efficient. So that is why I think it is more important for them to fix a current problem before deciding to move to a new building because the original problem doesnt go away just because they are in a new building.

[Artist]

I stand corrected on the assumption that a rehab/replace comparison was done. (A little homework before posting is a good idea!) You are right, Urbanlife, that relocating does not solve the problem of the existing building as an energy sink. While this building is relatively new it predates computers, all ideas of energy conservation, and the need for terrorist security. These will all be addressed while living up to Portland's philosophy of reuse and recycle. I admire this philosophy, and think it is cheaper in the long run.

I notice that in most of the articles I read, the greening of the building is most written about. Less attention is given to the security upgrades that come with this rehab. Guess it just isn't sexy enough.

[scleeb]

Well my issues towards McCain go back for a while now of watching his actions as a senator. He is happy to not try to bring new money into his state, that is fine, but I am okay with our senators trying to bring money into this state.

Though I will agree, your approach does make sense, but the reason why I would like to see this building renovated than simply building a new building is because we need to start looking at our current crop of buildings and understand how each of them is wasting energy and fix those issues. Building a new energy efficient federal building while keeping this one would actually add to the energy consumption because you will still have the same problems with this building and a new building that also consumed its portion of energy, even it is is very efficient. So that is why I think it is more important for them to fix a current problem before deciding to move to a new building because the original problem doesnt go away just because they are in a new building.

Urbanlife- I think we both agree that the EG/WW building is not efficient and should be improved. The same can be said of the vast majority of commercial office space in the CBD built prior to 1990. Here is my contention, sell the EG/WW as GSA surplus, then let the private sector investor whom purchases the building make the needed upgrades. In this way, the costs of upgrading the EG/WW are shifted from the public sector to the private sector. The USG could even sell the EG/WW building to a future developer at a substantial discount with the provision that it be upgraded to a LEED certification. Again, I think it’s a win-win for Portland.

[philopdx]

Yes scleeb, both McCain and Coburn can go %^&* themselves. Here's why:

I'm always amused by the fact that right-wing rants of fiscal discipline generally come from leaders of states that receive the most federal funding vs. taxes paid to the federal government.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

As the preceding link shows, Oregon paid $23.5 billion in federal taxes in 2005, while receiving $22.8 billion in benefits from the federal government, contributing $700 million to the national kitty by the sweat of our collective brow.

Put another way, we Oregonians received .93 cents in benefits for every dollar we paid in federal taxes.

In contrast, in 2005 Arizona received $44.6 billion in payments from the federal government while paying federal taxes in the amount of $35.9 billion. That's an aggregate welfare payment of $8.7 BILLION, or $1.19 in benefits for every dollar paid to the federal government.

In 2005, Oklahoma received $27.6 billion in federal benefits while paying federal taxes of $19.6 billion. That equates to $8 BILLION of federal welfare payments for dear Mr. Coburn's state, or an impressive $1.36 in benefits for every dollar paid!

While wealthy, elderly white males lose sleep over how Buckwheat and Aunt Jamima caricatures are defrauding the government, it's clear the Coburn and McCain are the ultimate welfare queens - combined they slurped $16.7 BILLION from the government's teet in 2005 alone! MAZEL TOV gentlemen!

I feel rather strongly that these fine men should focus on their OWN state's voracious appetites for gobbling other people's money, and stay out of the business of states that actually carry their own f$%^&g weight.

[scleeb]

Wonderful sentiments there phil. Excuse me if I don't choose to pile on a person, whom from all outward appearances, seems to be a genuinely decent man. So McCain doesn't like the Stimulus bill and you do. So McCain's a Rep and you're not. I get it. Lets move on, this political tripe gets real old, real fast. What do you think about the original point of all this? Do you think renovation of the EG/WW is better for Portland than new construction? That's the discussion I was hoping to have.

[Artist]

This is just too good to ignore. I vote for renovation of the fed bldg assuming it is an otherwise sound building that can continue to serve fed needs efficiently. Looking toward Europe, they build for the long term. We discard our buildings after 35-50 years. That is foolish.

As to dumping (excuse me, selling) an inefficient building to a private buyer expecting or hoping he will cough up the millions to rehab it--I just don't see that as very likely.

[pylon]

I was hoping that Portland would have two world-class examples of how to implement green design, in the same neighborhood:
1. a living building- Oregon Sustainability Center
2. a green renovation- the Federal building

[scleeb]

This is just too good to ignore. I vote for renovation of the fed bldg assuming it is an otherwise sound building that can continue to serve fed needs efficiently. Looking toward Europe, they build for the long term. We discard our buildings after 35-50 years. That is foolish.

As to dumping (excuse me, selling) an inefficient building to a private buyer expecting or hoping he will cough up the millions to rehab it--I just don't see that as very likely.

Actually, local private developers spend millions renovating old buildings every year in Portland. I'm sure you know that. Look at the McMenemins' portfolio, Venerable Properties list of rehabs, the recent Meier & Frank renovation, the Brewery Blocks redevelopment, Unico's renovation of Big Pink's lavatories, the recent renovation of the Federal Reserve by Harsch, just to name a few. I could go on forever. Why does a private sector renovation of the EG/WW seem very unlikely? With all the energy efficiency/sustainability programs available to developers today, I would say a major renovation of the EG/WW building would be quite likely.

Incidentally, I agree that discarding older buildings is foolish. But name the buildings that Portland has "discarded" after 40-50 years? Portland's recent history shows us that discarding older buildings is no longer a common practice here. Those instances are noteworthy for there rarity.

[urbanlife]

Actually, local private developers spend millions renovating old buildings every year in Portland. I'm sure you know that. Look at the McMenemins' portfolio, Venerable Properties list of rehabs, the recent Meier & Frank renovation, the Brewery Blocks redevelopment, Unico's renovation of Big Pink's lavatories, the recent renovation of the Federal Reserve by Harsch, just to name a few. I could go on forever. Why does a private sector renovation of the EG/WW seem very unlikely? With all the energy efficiency/sustainability programs available to developers today, I would say a major renovation of the EG/WW building would be quite likely.

Incidentally, I agree that discarding older buildings is foolish. But name the buildings that Portland has "discarded" after 40-50 years? Portland's recent history shows us that discarding older buildings is no longer a common practice here. Those instances are noteworthy for there rarity.

We are very lucky that tearing down and building new isnt that common in Portland compared to other cities....it does happen here, just not that much.

[Artist]

Oregon will become my home next year. My participation in Skyscraperpage is one means of informing myself of conditions and politics of Oregon. Some of my comments are not well-informed, and I'm glad to read the responses. Scleeb's list of renovations is good, but weren't they done when banks were lending freely? Are banks currently backing private sector major requests in Portland? I think low-risk and low-$ renovations will be the trend for most of the next decade. Hope I'm wrong.

[scleeb]

Oregon will become my home next year. My participation in Skyscraperpage is one means of informing myself of conditions and politics of Oregon. Some of my comments are not well-informed, and I'm glad to read the responses. Scleeb's list of renovations is good, but weren't they done when banks were lending freely? Are banks currently backing private sector major requests in Portland? I think low-risk and low-$ renovations will be the trend for most of the next decade. Hope I'm wrong.

Artist, thanks for the background. I'm glad to hear you are moving to P-town. As for bank lending. This is a subject I know a great deal about. You are correct that we are currently experiencing a very tight credit environment. Nonetheless, despite the recession, Portland still maintains strong fundamentals. The city is not over-built. The CBD is holding up quite well. Most current leasing activity shows a strong bias toward the CBD (which is close to me heart). There is a flight to quality, and many of the more stable tenants in the marketplace are seizing the opportunity to renegotiate their leases, or upsize/downsize their space. Net-Net, with the exception of a few overextended commercial developers, Portland is faring the downturn better than most and lenders know it. If a good redevelopment opportunity pops up in the next 12-24 months, and a solid business case can be articulated, lenders will lend. Warren Buffet recently said he feels like a mosquito at a nudist convention. I second that sentiment. Asset prices are depressed to multi-generational lows. Liquid investors are ready to pounce. When things start to thaw, they will thaw fast.

[MR. Cosmopolitan]

This is just too good to ignore. I vote for renovation of the fed bldg assuming it is an otherwise sound building that can continue to serve fed needs efficiently. Looking toward Europe, they build for the long term. We discard our buildings after 35-50 years. That is foolish.
Sorry to contradict but in Europe most 50s 60s and 70s buildings were badly built. I would say even worst built than the American ones.

They were very cheaply built in a desperate attempt to house the people coming out of the slums and the wreckage of the Second World War as well as more lately the extreme growth caused by the baby boom.

These buildings were so poorly built that in some cases didn't even live 30 years. I don't know how the state of this building is, but it must not be a very good one, since it needs such a costly reform. I would say it would be better to demolish it and built a new one on its site, its more economical.

[philopdx]

Wonderful sentiments there phil. Excuse me if I don't choose to pile on a person, whom from all outward appearances, seems to be a genuinely decent man. So McCain doesn't like the Stimulus bill and you do. So McCain's a Rep and you're not. I get it. Lets move on, this political tripe gets real old, real fast. What do you think about the original point of all this? Do you think renovation of the EG/WW is better for Portland than new construction? That's the discussion I was hoping to have.

What some people call "tripe", other people call facts. Moving on...

The remodel costs $11 million less than a new building, assuming the conditions were identical to the new building referred to in San Fransisco. I gather that the crux of the issue is why spend X dollars when you could have 100,000 more square feet for Y additional dollars? Is the marginal utility of something shinier and newer worth $11 million more of the taxpayer's dollars?

So then, should the government be in the business of spending more money to get something marginally better than what it has (or has planned)? I find irony in the fact that this thinking, normally associated with the ideological left, is now being employed as a "conservative" argument to discredit a "liberal" program. Odd times we live in.

Assuming we do build something new and shiny on another block, what of the net present value of the negative cash flows of the still-standing, inefficient hulk of the GSA building? Are we assuming the private market will swoop in and invest millions to create a shining addition to the Portland skyline, a true beacon of modernity and efficiency? You know, like they did with Park Avenue West?

[Artist]

[QUOTE=MR. Cosmopolitan;4603366]Sorry to contradict but in Europe most 50s 60s and 70s buildings were badly built.

That was indeed a bad patch for construction. I was referring to older European buildings. Given the materials and knowledge they had at the time, those were built to last centuries, and they did. Ours don't.

[Okstate]

I finally got a reply from SERA and we'll be getting updated renderings of this project in Mid-December.

It's the middle. I am ready to see this bad boy.

[zilfondel]

Hmm, I wonder how much a new building would cost. By comparison, the Mark Hatfield US Courthouse building cost $129 million in 1997, thereby translating (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/)to $173 million in 2009 dollars.

The Mark Hatfield building is 15 meters taller than the Green/Wendell building, and offers 2 fewer floors (16 vs 18) and 193,000 more sq ft of space.

A $133 million renovation sounds like a total gut & rebuild to me. At least we don't need to pay for additional land acquisition (the current block is worth (http://www.portlandmaps.com/detail.cfm?action=Assessor&propertyid=R246137&state_id=1S1E03BD%20%201600&address_id=646167&intersection_id=&dynamic_point=0&x=7644104.404&y=681181.073&place=1220%20SW%203RD%20AVE&city=PORTLAND&neighborhood=DOWNTOWN&seg_id=150077)$14 million) costs and trying to lease out office space in a down economy.

[RoseCtyRoks]

From the Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703438404574598071829766080.html


DECEMBER 16, 2009 Green Builders Awaiting the Green
Distribution of Billions of Dollars in Stimulus Aid Could Take Months Amid Long Lead Times
By CHRISTINA S.N. LEWIS
The nation's green-building industry is awaiting billions of dollars in economic-stimulus funding earmarked to make government buildings more energy efficient. But based on the slow pace of allocations thus far, it could take months or years for spending to trickle down to contractors.

The General Services Administration, which oversees the federal government's property, was allocated $5.5 billion as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed by Congress in February, of which $2 billion should be allocated before Dec. 31. The initiative is designed to create jobs and to pioneer cutting-edge technology in construction that is environmentally friendly.

At a time when construction on private projects has stalled, advocates of green building hope the GSA, which is America's largest landlord with a 1,500-building portfolio, can use its purchasing power and nationwide reach to lower costs, test emerging products and educate the industry.

The value of having the government lead the industry on such projects "is priceless," said Jason Hartke, vice president of national policy for the U.S. Green Building Council, a nonprofit advocacy organization.

The Edith-Green Wendell Wyatt Building in Portland, Ore., is set for a new exterior "skin" that will make it more energy efficient, including 20,000 solar cells and a series of vegetation fins along one side.
But so far, the agency has allocated just $1.5 billion, or 75%, of the funds it was appropriated for 2009 and is racing to allot an additional $500 million by the end of the year, just two weeks away. The agency said bids for work are coming in under budget, a good thing, but one that slows them down from meeting its benchmark.

In addition, the GSA has paid out only $89 million. "What we've got now is a lot of architects working overtime to get the work done," said Bob Peck, the agency's commissioner of public buildings. Mr. Peck said the delay in spending reflects the long lead time required to draw up building plans, which can take a minimum of six to nine months.

Economists said the delays in putting the funds to work illustrate the challenges of trying to quickly create new jobs in an industry that traditionally moves slowly. And government planners tend to move more slowly than private industry, according to developers.

"Obviously, [the funds] would have to be outlaid for it to create jobs," said Kermit Baker, chief economist for the American Institute of Architects. "But once [companies] feel that money is coming through the pipeline, it'll have a dramatic effect."

The projects that are furthest along are those that already were in the works, but on hold due to lack of funding. For example, the agency broke ground on a federal courthouse in Austin, Texas, in September. Planning began eight years ago.

Some projects also are complex, requiring long planning periods. The central federal office in Portland, Ore., the Edith Green-Wendell Wyatt Building, was allocated $133 million to modernize the 30-year-old, 510,000-square-foot building, including a daylight-adaptive lighting system that will reduce consumption 50%; and new mechanical, electrical and elevator systems. The GSA plans to hire a construction manager to begin drawing up blueprints in the next few weeks.

The design plan also calls for a new exterior "skin" that will have as many as 20,000 solar cells on the roof and a series of vegetation fins along the building's western side, which is meant to provide a natural solution to the problem of overheating from sunlight. The vegetation will grow lush in the summer, cooling the building. In the winter, the plants will shrink, allowing sun to filter in, Mr. Peck said. The technique has been used in Washington by the Finnish Embassy, he said.

Energy efficiency is in the spotlight this week as world leaders meet in Copenhagen to discuss climate change. Meanwhile, local governments are tackling the issue as well. Last week, New York, with the backing of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, passed rules requiring large commercial landlords to take steps to make existing buildings more energy efficient.

Green retrofits are gaining ground in the private sector as well, as companies realize they can save money long term. For example, Adobe Systems Inc. spent $1.4 million upgrading its San Jose, Calif., headquarters in 2006 and saved $1.2 million a year. Moreover, $400,000 in tax rebates allowed the company to make back its investment in just 9½ months, according to Buildings magazine. New York landlord Anthony Malkin, who is engaged in a retrofit of the Empire State Building, is set to give a presentation on energy efficiency in San Francisco next year.

A commercial retrofit should lower a building's energy costs by at least 15% in order to be financially viable for a landlord, some observers said. Typically, investors make back their money within four years, due to tax incentives and reduced maintenance costs. Commercial real estate accounts for about 30% of the nation's electricity usage.

Meanwhile, construction firms and architects suffering amid the dearth of private construction, hope to snag some of the government's business.

Emcor Group Inc., a $5.5 billion building-systems construction company, said it has managed to replace the roughly 15% to 30% of lost private construction business with public-sector spending on government buildings, transportation, schools and health care, according to Frank MacInnis, Emcor's chairman and chief executive.

Write to Christina S.N. Lewis at christina.lewis@wsj.com

[scottb]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sioux612
I finally got a reply from SERA and we'll be getting updated renderings of this project in Mid-December.
It's the middle. I am ready to see this bad boy.
I've been working with SERA on the renderings for this project, and I can tell you that the renderings are "in the can" and we just need to release them in the right order. By all accounts, this project has captured the attention of the White House, and they would like to control its release for the time being. Shouldn't be much longer though - probably by the first or second week of January. I'll be sure and post them here as soon as I can.

[Okstate]

Initial thoughts? ^ Doesn't have to be too specific.

[urbanlife]

I've been working with SERA on the renderings for this project, and I can tell you that the renderings are "in the can" and we just need to release them in the right order. By all accounts, this project has captured the attention of the White House, and they would like to control its release for the time being. Shouldn't be much longer though - probably by the first or second week of January. I'll be sure and post them here as soon as I can.

Good to hear, I always enjoy seeing local firms getting some much needed national attention.

[philopdx]

<sarcasm>

I've been working with SERA on the renderings for this project, and I can tell you that the renderings are "in the can" and we just need to release them in the right order. By all accounts, this project has captured the attention of the White House, and they would like to control its release for the time being. Shouldn't be much longer though - probably by the first or second week of January. I'll be sure and post them here as soon as I can.

Oh no! You telling me the only reason I can't get my render fix is due to the extremist, job-killing, socialist, weak-on-defense, communist, dijon-mustard-eating, kow-towing, arugla-topped, effette, egg-headed, fascist, terrorist-loving, acorn-gobbling, raging liberal, grandma-killing, America-hating wishes of the White House???

OBAMA IS A RENDERIST!!

:tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum:

</sarcasm>

[puerco]

Oh no! You telling me the only reason I can't get my render fix is due to the extremist, job-killing, socialist, weak-on-defense, communist, dijon-mustard-eating, kow-towing, arugla-topped, effette, egg-headed, fascist, terrorist-loving, acorn-gobbling, raging liberal, grandma-killing, America-hating wishes of the White House???

OBAMA IS A RENDERIST!!

:tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum:

Are you missing a brain?

[bvpcvm]

Are you missing a brain?

philo just forgot his </sarcasm> tag is all

[philopdx]

Fixed.

<sarcasm>
P.S. Glenn Beck is my hero.
</sarcasm>

[scottb]

Here is the first of the four renderings (this one is taken at grade from the southwest):
http://changeobserver.designobserver.com/media/images/jones_1.jpg
Hope to be able to share the other soon :)

[scleeb]

Holy Mother... Is that real? That can not be real. What is the green stuff? Are those plants?

[RoseCtyRoks]

^ The unveiling has begun! I like what I (can) see so far. Thanks for posting. Is this design finalized....a done deal? Or are there other possibilities/renderings of a totally different design? Thanks again for this.

[Artist]

Wow--think of the noise and heat reduction that wall will perform.

[Sioux612]

The view from that side of building has to suck.

[smendesPDX]

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/sbmendes/jones_1.jpg

[2oh1]

Gasp.

[scleeb]

http://changeobserver.designobserver.com/media/images/jones_1.jpg

OK, I will say it...

The "Vegetative Skin" has to be the stupidest looking building feature I've ever seen. With the possible exception of Frodo Baggins, I can't imagine anyone would want to work behind that giant Wall of Asparagus. This is worse than doing nothing.

[pdxdash]

i love it! I realize it's an early rendering, but the concept is fantastic. It's appeal for me is the same as the Portland Building in that it's not great design but it is completely different than the ubiquitous usual glass and concrete tower. And that's also why I'm not crazy about the zgf tower or 12 west or whatever they call it...it looks like basic glass rectangle without much interest(imo)

[Okstate]

The roof looks like the bottom of a Nike running shoe & the vegetation looks like racks of area rugs. I like it!

[WestCoast]

if the living roofs in this town are any indication, it will be dead and dry within 6 months.

That said, kudos for trying something new. At least we get SOMETHING for our $110Million.


---
Face it people, it fits in Portland. We rule!

[philopdx]

OMGAWD, I should have been more careful what I wished for. I was only kidding about the Arugula. :burstbubble

[rsbear]

Love it or hate it, Portland will likely get a lot of press on this one.

[Sioux612]

What does the East side of the building look like?

[mcbaby]

The roof looks like the bottom of a Nike running shoe & the vegetation looks like racks of area rugs. I like it!

Area rugs? Hmmmm more like astro turf. The roof reminds me of some hideous office lighting.

[RoseCtyRoks]

Well......On second thought, how about those millions going towards some much needed bridge building/repair work in the area instead???:shrug: Just sayin'

[cab]

This can't be real??????

[Okstate]

Area rugs? Hmmmm more like astro turf. The roof reminds me of some hideous office lighting.

How about an astro turf rug runner for the hallway?

[scottb]

Is that real? That can not be real. What is the green stuff? Are those plants?It's real. They are climbing vines attached to cables - every couple floors there is a "shelf" extending from the face of the building with planters and connections for the cables.

Is this design finalized....a done deal? Or are there other possibilities/renderings of a totally different design?There are other renderings, but to my knowledge this is the only design direction currently being pursued. I hope to be able to post the other views of the building soon. (they show the north & east elevations)

BTW - the green screen is not likely to be as thick as shown in this view. The design is still conceptual, and this rendering is meant to show the greenery at its fullest extent (with some artistic license). Most of the year the growth will be much less full, and in the winter will be practically non-existent so as to let as much daylight into the building as possible. And the green screen is only on the west side - there is one "panel" on the south elevation at the SW corner (highly oblique in this view), but that's it.

The rooftop is a giant PV array angled down to the south for solar collection. The underside of the roof visible in this view is a "space frame" truss system supporting the PV's above. The other views will illustrate this condition much more clearly.

[ad hoc]

fyi, see this for more examples:
http://www.vegitecture.net/2009_10_01_archive.html

[tworivers]

I think this is an incredible idea. The rendering looks pretty funny --I mean, I laughed when I saw it-- but I can see how it could have an awesome presence when completed, as well as being highly functional. Especially if the greenery isn't quite that carpet-thick ;). Many thanks to scottb for sharing this with the forum.

[pylon]

It would be nice if they give the final design a good going-over/tweaking/refinement, but this will be pretty amazing if completed. I hope they took human factors/work environment considerations into account in its design. It's too easy to get over-focused on one area (e.g., looks/design/statement, energy savings) at the expense of other factors. Just ask the folks who work in the Portland Building.

Now, if we can get the Living Building up and running we'll have a couple of noteworthy buildings to liven up the SW downtown. It would be nice to have even more in order to help bridge that part of the DT with the South Waterfront, and bump up the density. The planned Milwaukee light rail extension will help as well.

[zilfondel]

It's real. They are climbing vines attached to cables - every couple floors there is a "shelf" extending from the face of the building with planters and connections for the cables.

There are other renderings, but to my knowledge this is the only design direction currently being pursued. I hope to be able to post the other views of the building soon. (they show the north & east elevations)

BTW - the green screen is not likely to be as thick as shown in this view. The design is still conceptual, and this rendering is meant to show the greenery at its fullest extent (with some artistic license). Most of the year the growth will be much less full, and in the winter will be practically non-existent so as to let as much daylight into the building as possible. And the green screen is only on the west side - there is one "panel" on the south elevation at the SW corner (highly oblique in this view), but that's it.

The rooftop is a giant PV array angled down to the south for solar collection. The underside of the roof visible in this view is a "space frame" truss system supporting the PV's above. The other views will illustrate this condition much more clearly.

I think it's a great concept and I have high hopes for the actual built product. Unfortunately, the renderings are a bit... erm, low budget. But whatever works, I guess. Its a very technical approach to a problem of efficiency... It's pretty obvious that we have little idea of what it will actually look like when built (the experience of being under the screen on the street, for instance).

One thing's for sure - this building is going to grab a LOT of attention. This, plus the Oregon Sustainability Center, are going to garner a heck of a lot of press and photography.

Question: how big is the roof? And high much higher than the current roofline will it be? It looks like it will be adding a little bit of height to the current building.

[scottb]

Unfortunately, the renderings are a bit... erm, low budgetCan you elaborate a little on this? There is only the one rendering so far that has been released, are there others? Also, the version posted here is very small, and so much of the detail is being lost. I'd like to understand what you mean by "low-budget"

It's pretty obvious that we have little idea of what it will actually look like when built (the experience of being under the screen on the street, for instance).As I have said before, there are other views "in the can", one of which is a close-up of the west entry that also shows the green screen feature in more detail. Soon, I promise :)

Question: how big is the roof? And high much higher than the current roofline will it be? It looks like it will be adding a little bit of height to the current building.The roof is actually larger than the building below - it extends out about 10-12 feet from the perimeter. The highest point of the roof is approximately 40 feet above the existing parapet, so yes it will be a taller building as a result. The intent is to "create a dialogue" with the Hatfield Courthouse a block to the north - one of the other views will show this relationship.

One thing's for sure - this building is going to grab a LOT of attention. This, plus the Oregon Sustainability Center, are going to garner a heck of a lot of press and photography.Absolutely - this project has already gotten the attention of the White House, and it is seen as a "poster child" for the creation of green stimulus jobs.
BTW - what is the status of the Oregon Sustainability Center? Is it still moving forward?

[crow]

haha - i love it. Face it, this is nothing more than a rendered diagram. Give it some time to gel, and maybe we will actually have something you can actually give some constructive criticism to. I say - keep going, develop it further. I fear though, that the boldness of the concept renderings will be lost in translation and may result in something a little underwhelming. I look forward to seeing more before I pass such harsh judgement.

[urbanlife]

haha - i love it. Face it, this is nothing more than a rendered diagram. Give it some time to gel, and maybe we will actually have something you can actually give some constructive criticism to. I say - keep going, develop it further. I fear though, that the boldness of the concept renderings will be lost in translation and may result in something a little underwhelming. I look forward to seeing more before I pass such harsh judgement.

That is usually what happens with bold ideas in the development world. I hope this turns out well for the city because it is going to bring us alot of press one way or another.

[PacificNW]

From the SERA website:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at54258PM.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at54348PM.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at54237PM.png


Rendering of present building (for comparison):


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at91348PM.png

[Sioux612]

From the SERA website:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at54258PM.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at54348PM.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/PacificNW/Dump/Screenshot2010-01-13at54237PM.png

From the last rendering it looks very much the same other than the roof.

[rsbear]

The first shot reminds me of scenes from "Life Without People"...

That said - I've been a "student" of Downtown Portland since the late 70's and I've always disliked the Federal Building to the point that I would have been happy had it been replaced by a 7-11 (kidding). Anything is an improvement. But, somehow, this still looks a bit awkward. But is certainly better than what's currently there!

Now, what can we do with One Main Place...?

[RoseCtyRoks]

Thanks for posting these pics, Pacific NW!! Not a bad looking building, to say the least.

Ah.....this is more like it. Not nearly as overwhelming as what we saw previously. It looks like the vines/vegitation will be mainly on the west side, for summer cooling and winter light attracting. I would think they will have to keep it all from overgrowing periodically, and good luck to the window washers!!

[2oh1]

Is it possible they're taking a shock and awe approach by releasing an over the top graphic first, and then releasing more realistic renderings?

SHOCK!!! "It's hideous!!!"
Awe... "Maybe it's not so bad after all."

I'm not convinced the west side of this thing won't end up looking ridiculous when it's done, but if it isn't a disaster (and it probably won't be), it'll certainly be great for our city's reputation, so I'm all for it. It''s hard to even imagine what it'll look like when done since I've never seen anything like it before.

I'm curious about how those fins will hold up under the stress of a wind storm. Granted, we tend to get those in the winter, when the fins would have less growth on them. Still... I don't want to see the federal building sailing its way up 3rd Ave :)

...then again, maybe I do. That would be quite a show.

[urbanlife]

I'm curious about how those fins will hold up under the stress of a wind storm. Granted, we tend to get those in the winter, when the fins would have less growth on them. Still... I don't want to see the federal building sailing its way up 3rd Ave :)

...then again, maybe I do. That would be quite a show.

it would probably be no different than any building with balconies on it. I am guessing they will be stripping this building down to its structure and re-skinning the building, when they do this, the fins will be completely attached to the structure however way they choose to do it. But I do agree, I do hope this doesnt turn out looking odd, but so far I am pleased with the second set of renderings.

[puerco]

I like the new look. When the original building was announced in the Oregonian along with a rendering, I was really disappointed. Another clone from Portland's unimaginative architects at SOM. I even wrote the paper saying we needed to give other firms in town a chance to design some of these larger projects. I don't believe SOM (Skidmore, Owing & Merrill) still has an office in Portland, do they?
I think an evergreen vine would look best but it makes a lot more sense to have one that sheds its leaves to let in some winter sunshine. It's a vast improvement on the original.

[sowat]

hits the NY Times

Portland High-Rise to Get 250-Foot-Tall Trellises

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: January 16, 2010

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) -- They haven't figured out yet how to get the pruning done, but architects and federal officials plan one of the world's most extensive vertical gardens in downtown Portland -- what amounts to a series of 250-foot-tall trellises designed to shade the west side of an 18-story office building.

It is not a new idea to use greenery vertically as ''living architecture,'' running plants up the sides of a building to keep it cool.

But even in a city with a reputation for rainfed greenery as well as for green architecture, the wall of the Edith Green-Wendell Wyatt Federal Building would stand out....

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/16/us/AP-US-Green-Building.html?_r=1&ref=global-home