Comments on: Frank Gehry Slams LEED, Calls Sustainable Design “Political”

By: sayno2leed

sayno2leed — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:53:26 +0000

I took the LEED AP test today. I didn’t pass because I didnt remember how they charged their fees (by square ft, height…) and also because i didnt remember what size their logo should be in a letterhead. There were so many questions about fees and about how many consultants would “make things better” (in other words USGBC’s pockets) while not much else was given any importance. It was so disappointing people that have voice are taking advantage of the situation and make green building a thing about money. I wish there was someone that would stop USGBC’s exploitation of people truly concerned about the environment. I see so many people who want to learn more about helping the environment and make better choices but they cant get their properties certified because of LEED’s bureaucracy and hefty fees. Im so horrified LEED is still considered the leader of green building. With LEED’s guidance, this world will end up with more environmental damage because with their greed and idiocy they will make people not want to care about our planet anymore if they have to go thru LEED’s nonsense.

By: nonleed

nonleed — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:14:03 +0000

Political? Absolutely!
Before you try to identify me as someone who is not concerned with the environment, allow me to state that I am concerned about:clean air, clean water, energy consumption and abuse of our landfills.

The overall REAL agenda of LEED is control. The founders of the LEED process were (are) environmental activists – and yes, environmental activist lawyers.

If you will look at the bios for some of these people, you will see that they support: global warming activism, no drilling on American soil, no refinery development and no nuclear power plant construction. As I said LEED is about control!

The LEED idea resembles the old adage of the “fox in charge of the hen-house.” The people that are making the rules for LEED are generally NOT pro-construction in the first place. If you can noodle through the concept of LEED you should be able to resonably conclude that the real drive for LEED to become LAW.

Whe LEED becomes LAW, then we will have building and zoning departments telling us what we can build, what size we can build it, where we can build it, how it is to be designed add on infinitum….

Oh, mr. developer, business owner, architect, your design does not meet the LAW for LEED, so you can’t build. The cost of LEED construction coupled with the over-zealous requirements of LEED (read LAW)will be the death nail for the construction industry.

By: Frank Gehry speaks out about his LEED comments | Inhabitat - Green Design Will Save the World

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:37:36 +0000

[...] months ago, legendary American architect Frank Gehry ruffled many green feathers by declaring that green architecture and sustainable design are “political” and that LEED certification is often given for “bogus stuff”. His comments, [...]

By: Sharon Perkins

Sharon Perkins — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 01:28:11 +0000

The LEED certification process provides design teams a practical economical path to construct buildings that are energy efficient, use less water, and cause less harm to the environment during and after construction than conventional methods of construction.
Statements “adding a bike rack to a building does not make it an environmental building” and “the costs is far greater to build LEED certified” made by individuals who are considered experts in the field of design and construction, would make one think the whole process is bogus.

What Gehry left out is the rest of the story for HOW bike racks are part of an integrated design that started from site selection, building orientation, and location connecting the buildings occupants to within walking distance of basic services, reducing the need to drive a car.

Those “bike racks” have been installed to promote the use of bicycles. It allows those who want to take their bike to work to do so. The building has a place for your bike and there are facilities for showering and changing into work attire as well.

The building is most likely within 1/2 mile of basic services; dry cleaner, restaurants, gym, post office to name a few, making walking a pleasant option for those who want to get personal errands done during the lunch break, or simply want to take a walk to a local spot for lunch. AND when a design team striving to reduce the amount of carbon generated by the building PLANNED for the installation of solar panels on the roof of covered bike racks, installed a green roof on the building, as well as provided preferred parking for LE/FE vehicles, making every effort to maximize carbon reduction, this then isn’t about politics and certifications its about being responsible for heavens sake.

When one sees “bike racks” within 200 yards of an entrance to a LEED certified building that entire building was constructed to spew less carbon into the atmosphere than conventional buildings, use less energy, less water and provide its occupants a healthier atmosphere to live and/or work in.

It’s unfortunate that this guy could get away with making a half assed assessment of the LEED certification process by alluding to bike racks as winning points as if installing them alone would accomplish LEED certification.

By: 00SolarTJ

00SolarTJ — Thu, 20 May 2010 17:43:47 +0000

Gehry’s an over rated dinosaur who’s only claim to fame is adding frivolous excess to the buildings he “designs”. I don’t put much stock into what he has to say either way. The problem with virtually anything that involves cost these days is that our social and economic systems aren’t set up to factor in the true, long term, costs of goods and services. We still value growth for growth’s sake. We value short term gains over long term loses. We value money spent on flash and sizzle (i.e. wavy custom made windows and roof systems that Gehry does ad nauseum) over money spent on true value to the client and society (i.e. energy efficiency and sustainable goods and services). This guy can’t retire soon enough in my opinion.

By: hbbb222

hbbb222 — Tue, 18 May 2010 04:19:02 +0000

I\’m not old, and I\’m not set in my ways. I would like to know however, how is locking yourself in an energy efficient/green house better than playing and working outside, not using an AC unit and being careful with your water usage. I\’m not trying to advocate a way of life, just remembering how mine started. My mother ran a whole house fan instead of fixing the HVAC. The air was fresh, the bills were low and I have no allergies. I do not want it to seem that I\’m trying to grandstand against \”green\” building, however I would like to know the advantages versus the last generation of living. I am in the southeast, so this is a \”climate controlled\” argument so to speak.

By: hesus

hesus — Sun, 16 May 2010 15:43:00 +0000

This is what happens when you’re OLD and set in your ways and you’re having a hard time catching up with the changing world all around you. LEED may not be perfect but we have to start somewhere. It’s better being a political issue than nothing at all. I find eating cumbersome but I eat anyway so I can live. Frankly I don’t understand how Frank go his fame because some of his works are just so fugly and pretentious!

By: SeelineDesign

SeelineDesign — Sat, 15 May 2010 03:12:53 +0000

This is an issue that I’m pretty sure most people are aware of. It’s just kind of sad that this reaction has to be made by a ‘celebrity’ in order to provoke any response. My thoughts are that Gehry is making this statement, not just to condemn the LEED certification process, but to force it to evolve. It’s not that LEED is bad, it’s just that it’s in its infancy and needs some foul language in order to force it to get better. Let’s hope for some growth from the industry.

By: ds

ds — Fri, 14 May 2010 21:31:56 +0000

I’s most amazing that abut every topic brings me to think of the financial system that blocks investment in energy savings because you get more out of your money by investing it elsewhere.
In other words the money you spend now will not buy the btu you need tomorrow because the savings have to compete with both, inflation AND interest rates.
The savings due to efficiency you’ll do in twenty years go against 20 years of basic interest rate. So far.
Yes, if heating cost was bundled with the selling price (suggested by Amory Lovins) things would still look much better for efficiency.
Now all this was off topic for he only was to say that …
they don’t look very nice. I generally think we should make ourselves bee seen much less but when I see efficient houses my poor old heart rejoices.

By: sustainablelaguna

sustainablelaguna — Fri, 14 May 2010 19:52:49 +0000

Building sustainably is a somewhat new practice to most developers and contractors. The USGBC’s LEED certification processes are a great way for developers and contractors to learn sustainable practices through a guided point system. Many cities are adopting green building codes, which is wonderful, but little or no knowledge on how to implement practices will drive some professionals out of business. Some argue that LEED may limit sustainable design but I think the bigger problem is the actual number of overwhelmed professionals that need guidance on making the health of the environment a large priority in their projects.

By: sustainablelaguna

sustainablelaguna — Fri, 14 May 2010 19:40:48 +0000

Building sustainably is a somewhat new practice to most developers and contractors. The USGBC’s LEED certification processes are a great way for developers, architects and contractors to learn sustainable practices through a guided point system. Many cities are adopting green building codes (which is wonderful and should be done everywhere) but truthfully little or no knowledge on how to implement practices will drive a lot professionals out of business. Some argue that LEED may limit sustainable design but I think the bigger problem is the number of overwhelmed professionals that do need some guidance on sustainable practices and principles.

By: marminio

marminio — Fri, 14 May 2010 02:35:57 +0000

The bikerack argument was addressed in the newest version of
LEED 2009. More points are awarded to energy efficiency and regional specific credits were added. I think the rating system is moving in the right direction, and the truth is that if you do not pursue green building certification, there is no accountability or measure for how green your project is. LEED helps to maintain focus on sustainability throughout the process.

Besides, every new version of LEED has a comment and review period, so rather than bad-mouthing LEED, you could be spending your energy productively with suggestions on how to improve it.

By: snodaisy

snodaisy — Thu, 13 May 2010 20:24:20 +0000

LEED is a political monster, as evil as any. Strive to make buildings the best they can be. Do not rely on one, self-imposed entity to be paid to judge your work. There is zero accountability in LEED’s decision making.
Frank Gehry’s my hero!

By: psconrad

psconrad — Thu, 13 May 2010 19:33:26 +0000

Frank Gehry is sounding like a cranky old man. The \”politics\” of the issue is actually the force behind a much needed change in our attitude towards Earth itself. Bike racks aren\’t \”bogus\” just because they don\’t have much of a quantifiable financial payback. Many of the things that are being thought about these days concern the ignored real costs of the way that things have been done in the past. Such costs can remain invisible unless our minds are in the right place to recognaize what they are. Sometimes the realization is the result of a catastrophe, like the Gulf oil \”leak.\” As far as I\’m concerned, even in the face of the big things, every little bit counts.

By: brenbe

brenbe — Thu, 13 May 2010 18:50:48 +0000

before leed we would not be having this conversation. leed has made it public. 99% of people who criticise leed as being \’all about products and fluff\’ or who say it does not address true energy efficiency or that it is \’outrageously expensive\’ have never fully explored the program, especially the program as it stands today with many revisions/growth over time. *Every Single* one of the criticisms that have been levelelled at Leed about how it doesn\’t do enough, people still leave lights on, it is possible to manipulate points, etc. fail to take into account that it *is a huge improvement over nothing* and taking steps is better than sitting on your behind as someone so aptly put it above. i actually love gehry\’s work and i love beauty and aesthetics and taking chances etc etc and it IS possible to do all this within the framework of leed. it is equally possible to build a boring leed building that simply haggles over points. so what. what percentage of buildings are boring and non-energy and resource efficient? taking steps vs. taking no steps – where do you stand. the improvements in leed continually address failings with the system. and, the leed rating system is driving the increases in efficiency, etc. requirements at the building regulations level. all this jazz about oh, bamboo is bad because it comes from far away, etc…. there are leed points obtainable for materials nearby (less than 500miles for all aspects of production). people are going to use all kinds of materials from all over the world with or without leed, give me a break and stop being so holier than thou. everything we do has an impact and unless you want to live in a cave you\’ll stop criticising and either applaud those who are making a difference or at least get out of their way. gehry is not a young man. he is not always right. his remarks may have not been entirely in the context of his beliefs but he should retract them and get with the program. but the next gehry will be a young man or woman who grew up with leed and will be able to take adventurous chances within the framework of greater sustainability.

By: Studearch

Studearch — Thu, 13 May 2010 17:22:18 +0000

I agree whole-heartedly with Gehry. Green building adds costs, but has benefit. LEED certification adds more costs and is arbitrary. Those costs must be borne by somebody and architecture is already a profession of low economc return with tremendous liability. The foundation of LEED (energy conservation, sustainability, etc.) is all worthy; it\’s the burden of certifying, tracking, recording, in pursuit of a plaque and more initials after your name that\’s troubling to me. All of the tenets of LEED are things we architects should have been doing all along. I look to post-WWII and Korean War architecture to provide inspiration in ways of using minimal materials and labor to produce maximum space and effects. Both of these eras were times of shortages. We used the best technology of the time and reduced the size and volumes to meet budgets. I continue to see LEED \”certified architects\” turning out irresponsible, wasteful, and frankly ugly designs – at least the one\’s that still have jobs and projects.

By: Prelitz

Prelitz — Thu, 13 May 2010 17:17:26 +0000

Having done net-zero and LEED projects, I agree with Gehry. The challenge with LEED is that it is a MEASUREMENT tool NOT a DESIGN tool. It’s also not very climate specific. A design team can do a great sustainable design then add up the points and obtain a plaque..unfortunately, “We need 2 more points to get Gold” tends to be a common problem. It’s about wholistic design principles that embrace passive solar first – then the minimum mechanical systems needed. Thta’s not emphasized

By: CLIFF CHANDLER

CLIFF CHANDLER — Thu, 13 May 2010 16:22:55 +0000

I have been a critic of LEED for a long time. I is good to see someone else get after the prima donna architect run political institution.

Look at LEED architect designed buildings and the monster size of their buildings. They waste space and use far more materials than needed to build them. The other joke is using materials that are supposed to be manufactured near the site location. Where does bamboo come from?

The fed’s and LEED need to work together and get ceiling fans, CFLs / LED lighting and other materials made here in the USA and stop using materials / products made outside or put-together outside of our country. How many photovoltaic panels are made entirely here in the USA? How about none.

Architects, please get your heads out of your nether regions and stop being so pompous.

By: Not the King

Not the King — Thu, 13 May 2010 14:00:30 +0000

Testeffe – there is a reason why LEED is called a Green Building Rating system, it looks at BUILDINGS, not our bad habits. It provides some of the tools that we need to try to live better – the buildings in which we operate. Having worked in LEED for the better part of 10 years, I am the first to say that it is far from perfect and likely does not manage to measure what we can truly do now, but are you saying that attempts to reduce our footprint by things we can control (the built environment) should be abandoned because people still insist on oversized houses, vehicles, and possessions? Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water…

By: joeholmes

joeholmes — Thu, 13 May 2010 01:56:38 +0000

Your article is very misleading. It seems to have been carefully written to create controversy. I doubt an architect with the prestige of Frank Gehry would say such nonsense. He is obviously in favor of green design but against an organization that works as a money machine. What do you get from them? – A plaque at the entrance of the building. Have you seen how horrendous the majority of the “LEED” certified buildings are? Green design is a moral attitude towards our cities and planet, not a certificate to show around. It has definitely become an advertising apparatus and a political platform. This is an example of zero journalistic experience, evident in the majority of the blogs where gossip is treated as fact. Where in the world is your fact checker? Obviously not on your payroll!