'Street of Dreams' Goes up in Flames
In a recent deliberate torching of four (unoccupied) luxury eco-homes on display near Seattle, authorities uncovered a spray-painted sign, which bore the initials of an organization calling itself the Earth Liberation Front or ELF. The signs read "Built Green? Nope black!" and "McMansions in RCDs r not green."  RCDs refer to rural cluster developments—which allow developers to cluster homes on a large lot in exchange for preserving open space, rural character, or environmental features.

The homes built for the 'Street of Dreams' display in Snohomish County, Washington, had been awarded the BuiltGreen label. They were marketed as using "best practices" of environmentally friendly high-end home construction - emphasizing features like landscaping that requires little water; water-pervious sidewalks designed to minimize runoff; reused lumber for construction; super-insulated walls and windows; and products made with recycled materials, such as carpet pads.

The burned houses, which were between 4,200 and 4,750 square feet in size, with prices up to nearly $2 million each, were advertised as being smaller than some of the huge houses (dubbed "McMansions" by ELF) featured in past years' shows. They also claimed their practices would result in positive outcomes for the overall landscape such as minimal scenery obstruction and "happier salmon."

However, according to surrounding neighbors and groups, local opposition had mounted even before construction began. They felt the development clashed with existing communities, and threatened local water sources and woodlands.  Once source claimed that "beaver dams and backwood trails had been ruined," and that "increased paving in the area pushed polluted runoff into nearby Bear Creek headwaters where endangered chinook salmon spawn."

Thus, despite the fact the houses were termed "green," and that the developers were making efforts to improve the materials used in their dwellings, the inescapable truth is that buildings do impact the environment. And it is often where they're built as much as how they're built that determines that impact.

The eco-irony, of course, is that burning a building to the ground - especially one filled with recycled materials - is anything but environmentally friendly. And violence is the antithesis of sustainability.

“This is releasing more carbon into the air than they ever would have by building the houses,” said listing agent Patti Smith, “That’s the tragic irony.”

But ELF's misguided efforts can be seen as a destructive attempt to raise a legitimate question: can large, single-family homes accessible only by car ever be truly green?

Rating Systems Proliferate
Presently, BuiltGreen is just one of the 70 regional green building rating systems in the U.S.  These programs all award points for different eco-friendly features, but one of the primary critiques of such programs is that the importance of "place" and "land use" are often neglected or underrated.

In the case of the "Street of Dreams," smart growth advocates initially supported the clustering concept; but not if it created islands of what they see as inappropriate urban development in ecologically sensitive areas.

Because such developments challenge both the notion of green building as well as traditional county zoning codes, the perception of whether something is truly green or just marketed that way is up to the individual.  Paradoxically, green building systems were developed precisely to help homeowners see through "greenwashing" practices, and effectively compare eco-friendly developments.

On Beyond LEED
However, some architects like Thom Mayne, a 2005 Pritzker Prize winner, whose Santa Monica-based firm Morphosis practices ecologically sensitive design, feel too evolved for green building rating systems. He and others refuse to be "co-opted by any green building movement or rating system."

Mayne particularly dislikes the LEED certification system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, despite the fact that it has become the industry standard. And while the USGBC acknowledges that the program has shortcomings, it is constantly refining and evolving the system.

Nevertheless, Build It Green's "Green Point" system, which was recently adopted by the city of San Francisco and the Northern California Builders Association for residential buildings, and Canada's Green Globe system are other popular alternatives, touted as being more user-friendly, and cheaper to implement than LEED.

For marketability, however, LEED certification clearly stands out as the leader because of its success in fueling the green building movement. But as that movement expands and develops, there is increasing debate about what LEED and other rating systems do and don't guarantee.

"Location Should Dictate Solutions"
One major limitation is that rating systems often award points based on the building, not its performance. In an often-cited example, there's a problem when a bike-storage room rates equally with a renewable-energy system.

Mayne feels the building design process should be energy-centric, de-carbonized, innovative, and research-intensive - one that integrates sustainability within the overall building program and surrounding environment, rather than tacking on hierarchical green features to score points or advertise environmentalism.  Ultimately, he says, "Location should dictate solutions" first and foremost. "There has to be a reversal of the L.A., Orange County, and Las Vegas patterns of sprawl."

As ELF has violently pointed out, the phenomenon of "green sprawl" - green buildings located in unsustainable contexts – is at best a partial improvement. For while the efficiency features and renewable materials at these sites give them advantages over non-green sprawl, they still bear many of the environmentally unfriendly aspects of standard low-density developments.

Ultimately, green building is not simply about individual structures; it must also address larger issues of community sustainability.

New Urbanism vs. Eco-Cities
Despite green building shortcomings, there are encouraging signs that smart growth methods are sprouting across America. The U.S. Green Building Council has begun using a pilot system called LEED Neighborhood Design (LEED-ND), which will include location and transportation-use in its green ratings.

The "New Urbanist" movement, as described by one of its leaders, Andrés Duany, "changes modern American lifestyle by stemming suburban sprawl in favor of medium-density towns and neighborhoods where houses, offices, shopping and leisure activities would all be within a walkable space."

Duany and his peers in the movement are helping city and town planners to dismantle the postwar zoning regulations that helped make the car king. Under the principles of New Urbanism, automobile transportation - "which is responsible for a significant portion of most Americans' individual carbon footprint" - would become an option, not a lifeline.

Still, others argue that even New Urbanism does not have a true smart-growth agenda because in rejecting crowded urban environments, it misses the eco-benefits of living close together. Richard Register, a pioneer of the ecocity movement and founder of Ecocity Builders and Urban Ecology, states, "New Urbanism is a small step in the right direction, but refuses to go further over the bridge. It claims to be a "strategy"...but a strategy to what?! They never say. I say: the ecocity."

Register argues that while cities are definitely a major part of the problem, rejecting them is not a solution. "The New Urbanists' four-story height limit makes no sense in an overpopulated world and shows no love of flamboyant high-density, mixed-use architecture with rooftop gardens, terraces, green-scaped bridges between buildings...even buildings that ARE bridges, etc."

Ecocities by definition are ecologically healthy cities that function like living organisms, with different functions arranged close to one another in mutually beneficial relationships. Register claims that old sections in ancient cultural sites, such as Katmandu, Nepal; Indian pueblos in the southwestern United States; Gulongyu, China; and Venice, Italy, fit the ecocity description. Modern day cities which come close include Curitiba, Brazil; and Portland, Oregon.

"Evolution is Optimism in Action."
So, can we expect eco-terrorists to attack Portland, or New Urbanist developments for not meeting their ideals of a fully sustainable, environmentally-restorative community? Hopefully not, of course.

We can, however, expect the green building movement to keep evolving.  After all, rating systems will only survive to the extent that they're useful to architects, builders, planners and home-buyers. It is positive pressure from green building enthusiasts that will most effectively advance green building standards, not violent rejection by ecoterrorists.

The residents and local organizations that were opposed to the 'Street of Dreams' development attacked by ELF hope to continue their nonviolent approach to influencing greener zoning policies. Those policies are now under review; and while the verdict is still out on how to truly embody sustainability in the built environment, it is clear that violence is not a forward-thinking response.

In the words of Paul Hawken, "Humanity is older than the oldest forest. Its capacity to adapt and restore is vastly underestimated. Evolution is optimism in action."

AP image courtesy of the New York Times.