THE NEXT GENERATION OF AMERICAN INFRASTRUCTURE

Michael Singer and Nancy Rutledge Connery

America’s aging public works need a full-scale makeover, and with the massive economic stimulus proposals before the Congress right now there is the first ray of hope that serious renewal efforts will begin soon. Beyond the urgent need for “shovel-ready” projects to create jobs, what kind of measurable returns should the public expect for the largest national investment in the history of the United States?

Specifically, how will new federal spending increase energy efficiency, water conservation, waste reduction, environmental health, customer service and neighborhood vitality, reduce greenhouse gases, or optimize existing assets? And, what exactly should the public (aka, public works consumers) be expected to contribute in return?

To find practical answers to such questions, public leaders at all levels of government and public works designers should begin to shift their frame of reference toward a “whole-system” perspective and investigate more resourceful ways to deliver essential services that transcend traditional boundaries and standard practices. They may even need to fundamentally overhaul whole infrastructure enterprises to make them more resilient and responsive to public needs in the face of increasingly volatile conditions and unforeseen national and local imperatives.

Every infrastructure project holds the potential to solve multiple problems and dramatically improve quality of life beyond its normal singular function—such as energy production, waste disposal or the movement of goods and people. We urge the recipients of the federal economic stimulus money to consider new ways to re-imagine and transform old facilities into enthralling, multi-functional community landmarks.

This is possible by applying an integrated design processes that identifies all of the actual and potential resources related to the facility; e.g., its land use, building surfaces, local resources, wasted water or energy, outputs and emissions to see how these elements can be eased or put to good use. The next step is to engage the adjoining and affected communities to determine specific needs and concerns and to tease out hidden opportunities for improved environmental performance, social equity, recreational and educational enhancements, and economic opportunities that go beyond limited facility job creation. Cutting-edge design and communication tools now permit the visualization and exploration of wide-ranging alternatives with minimal cost and risk and maximum public participation.

An illustrated preview of exciting possibilities for next generation public works is available at: http://www.edf.org/documents/7182_Infrastructure_and_Community.pdf. It is published jointly by the Environmental Defense Fund and Michael Singer Studio.

The ongoing work of our multi-disciplinary team over the past 15 years and many others throughout the world successfully demonstrates that this approach works. We must help communities solve intractable infrastructure problems in ways that generate vital jobs and a host of added value and public support rather than animosity—without damaging project financing. These added values are rarely associated with traditional infrastructure, but why not?

Additional References:

National Research Council. (2009). Sustainable Critical Infrastructure Systems: A Framework for Meeting 21st Century Imperatives. Retrieved September 3, 2009, from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12638

Connery, N. (2008). Development of Next-Generation U.S. Infrastructure Systems: A Framework for National Policy, Public Works Management & Policy; 12; 479 http://pwm.sagepub.com/

Michael Singer, Principal, Michael Singer Studio, msinger@sover.net www.michaelsinger.com

Nancy Rutledge Connery, NextGen Infrastructure, nancyconnery@mac.com

opulation growth in any large citybrings with it an inevitableincrease in residential solid waste.Both the waste management pro-grams and facilities to handle it,

including landfills, recycling, and newergeneration transfer centers, demandlong-range planning and creativeresponses to appease community con-cerns about the necessary infrastructure.

The foreseen closure of the 700-acreSkunk Creek Landfill led the publicworks department of Phoenix to embarkon a program to construct replacementresources. The results of the seven-yeareffort not only led to successful solutions,but allayed any public objections to thenew, two-part infrastructure that shouldsupport the municipally operated resi-dential collection and disposal service farinto the future.

When the former landfill finally closedin 2005, it had accepted 19 million tonsof solid waste during 34 years of opera-tion. The city was prepared for a seamlesscontinuance of service following exten-sive research, site evaluations, traffic, andcost/benefit analyses. These led to a new2,652-acre landfill 60 miles away devel-

oped through an IntergovernmentalAgreement with the Town of Buckeye.Because of the landfill’s distant location,the city needed to build the $32-millionNorth Gateway Transfer Station &Material Recovery Station (NTS/MRF)as a companion to an earlier facilityalready in operation on the south side.Lessons learned from operating thatsmaller facility significantly influencedthe design of the NTS/MRF.

The NTS/MRF balances imaginativearchitecture, sustainable design, and cost-effective material solutions for a facilitythat supports both utilitarian and educa-tional missions. Instead of an imposingbox-like industrial structure, the asym-metrical design, spatial massing, and theuse of color that plays off the desert con-text demonstrate that a building’s formneed not always follow the function. Theenvironmentally friendly character of thisfacility muted the all too frequent“NIMBY” objections to this vital infra-structure.

Service Center CornerstoneDeveloped on 43 acres of a 450-acre

municipally-owned site, the NTS/MRFfacility is the cornerstone of a futuremunicipal services campus and shouldeven set the architectural standards foradjacent commercial development.Municipal officials selected ConstructionManager-At Risk project delivery led byArizona’s Layton Southwest (www.lay-ton-const.com), with HDR, Inc.(www.hdrinc.com) as the prime consult-ant providing engineering services. J. R.Miller & Associates, Inc. (Brea, CA) pro-vided the architectural/structural design;and Sure Steel, Inc., a Butler Builder®(Butler Manufacturing Company,www.butlermfg.com) based in Sandy,

UT, supplied and erected the structuralsteel and metal building systems. Theresulting design embodies sustainabilityfeatures that have since become the cur-rent design guidelines for subsequentbuilding construction projects, notedMark Leonard, director of public works.

“There is a policy in effect now that allnew city structures must be designed andbuilt to LEED criteria,” Leonard said.“This particular project was designed andbuilt before enactment of that policy butwe designed into it as many features aspossible to reflect an environmentallyfriendly policy.”

The design development stage beganin September 2002 and incorporated amajor change in the building’s elevationthat produced $2 million in constructioncost savings. As once envisioned, thebuilding would have required a 20-ftdeep excavation below grade to visuallyreduce the building profile without com-promising enough inside clearance forcollection trucks to tip their loads ontothe work floor. Instead of the costly exca-vation to lower the work floor, the proj-ect team maintained a 52-ft height forthe facility and used an architecturallyvaried configuration and detailing toreduce the visual scale of the complex.The resulting facility could easily be mis-taken for a large office center or even aninstitutional building, such as a highschool.

The building’s fully-enclosed opera-tions prevent fugitive dust, odor, andnoise emissions. The primary subdivi-sions consist of three elements. The120,000-sq ft tipping area is designed tohandle up to 4,000 tons per day of pri-marily residential solid waste. A 52,000-sq ft portion of the tipping area isreserved for “self-haulers,” public accessthat is served by 18 large overhead doors.

PA building’s form need not always follow the function.

36 ■ GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING ■ MARCH–APRIL 2008 www.govengr.com

“Green” Takes Root inthe Phoenix Desert“Green” Takes Root inthe Phoenix Desert

Rooftop photovoltaic array that collectsenergy during the day helps to powerparking area and other outside lightsat night.

Both tipping areas are served by a 300-ftlong subterranean tunnel with threeloadout floor ports for transfer of trash tooutbound semi-tractor trailers. Sixteen to20 tractor trailers, each sized to haul thevolume of 2 1/2 curbside collectiontruckloads, make four roundtrips daily toand from the landfill located 60 milesaway near Buckeye. The work floor areasof both this space and the recycling areaare both significantly larger than thepredecessor facility on the south side ofthe city and the interior walls are moreabuse resistant.

Phoenix has for years practiced a poli-cy of managed competition in which citycrews are competitively bid against pri-vate residential collection companies.The approach offers a management toolfor comparing direct costs versus out-sourced suppliers. Only one of the resi-dential service areas is currently served bya private operator because of lower cost.Residents pay $24.45 per month for themunicipal service. The city also contractsout the 60-mile hauls to and from thenew landfill.

In the 60,000-sq ft materials recoveryfacility portion of the complex, contrac-tor crews sort and bale 200 tpd of recy-clable materials at the present rate, butthe facility was designed for 400 tpd toaccommodate future growth. The cityretains 90 percent of the revenues, set asa guaranteed floor price, for the eight

materials recovered by the contractor,Hudson Baylor Corporation (www.hud-sonbaylor.com).

The third component is the 12,000-sqft administration and employee spacethat presents the face of the facility. Itincorporates a viewing gallery inside thatoverlooks the work floors. This featureand a meeting room support public edu-cation tours during which school-age andother groups learn about the environ-mentally responsible stewardship ofmunicipal recycling that Phoenix fullyimplemented in 2000. The gallery andpublic spaces supporting it are segregatedfrom that for the workforce, an improve-ment over the earlier center on the city’ssouth side. As many as 15 groups amonth tour the center. The tilt-up con-crete walls and interior push walls neededto protect them against front-loaderoperations prevented customary ventila-tion louvers at low levels in the walls.Therefore, the architects designed thewing walls and other areas skinned withbronze-colored perforated metal panels asair flow intakes that supply ventilationinto the work zones.

Sustainable FeaturesButler Manufacturing Company sup-

plied the structural subsystems andstanding seam metal roof system with ahigh-emissivity “cool roof” coating fitted

on the custom-fabricated steel framing.The custom-engineered structural steelfor the primary framing was engineeredfor 24-ft bays and clear spans for the largecolumn-free work areas within the build-ing. Another inherent feature is the con-crete wall construction whose high ther-mal mass presents an energy efficient bar-rier against high summer temperatures.

Beyond those features, a significantamount of recycled material applied tothe project. The Butler and other metalbuilding systems themselves have 90 per-cent recycled steel processed by minimillsinto new raw steel for refabrication.Another material, the concrete used inthe project, contains recycled fly ash frompower plants. The building’s architectur-al and environmental aesthetics also havea practical side. Deep overhangs shadethe translucent clerestories from middaysun and the perforated metal wall panelaccents provide ventilation as well asadditional natural light. During night-hour operations, the clerestory stripsalong the eave glow from within whilethe landscape and parking area lightingoutside are powered by energy collectedduring the day by a rooftop photovoltaicarray and pole-mounted collectors.Daylight-controlled night-hour illumina-tion thus complements the natural day-lighting contribution on the cavernouswork floors.

www.govengr.com GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING ■ MARCH–APRIL 2008 ■ 37

Attention to aesthetics at the North Gateway Transfer Station & Material Recovery Station appear to make the building glow fromwithin during nighttime operation.

Site management by the project teamreflected the environmental awareness atthe highest level within the public worksdepartment. The asymmetrical design,

ground-hugging elevations, and bronzewall panels play off the colors of the val-ley’s craggy mesas and immediate land-scape. Native plants were inventoried and

salvaged for re-vegetation at the site,along with a carefully preserved, 90-ftwide natural arroyo. Future plans call forhiking and equestrian trails across thecampus.

For safety, the traffic managementscheme segregates large truck trafficaccess and egress from private vehiclesthat can self-haul and dispose of refusefor free. This required construction ofthree bridges on site. The vehicles alsouse separate areas of the work flow onceinside the building.

Phoenix has been at the forefront ofwaste management and proactive envi-ronmental initiatives since the 1980s. Inthe near future, Phoenix will implementa contract with a company that will tapthe methane off the closed landfill. Morecommonly flared at such sites, it will beenough to generate electricity for an esti-mated 3,000 homes. In November thecity fleet began using 20 percent biodieselas another added facet of practical envi-ronmentalism in municipal operations.

The North Gateway facility, the latestinvestment in waste management infra-structure, further underscores that ongo-ing commitment.

38 ■ GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING ■ MARCH–APRIL 2008 www.govengr.com

GE

The tipping floor where route trucks unload collections that are reloaded into semis forthe 60-mile haul to the new landfill.

Michael Singer Studio

AES Cogeneration FacilityLondonderry, New Hampshire, 2000 AES Londonderry, LLC commissioned Michael Singer in 1999 to design a new power plant, the largest in New England, in an Eco-Industrial Park in Londonderry. By 1999 this state-of-the-art Cogeneration Plant had already been engineered and received all approvals and permits. However, the site design and architectural design had not been completed. AES presented Singer with the challenge to design a facility that is well integrated into the community, in fact becomes an amenity to the community, and looks and behaves less like a typical industrial power plant, while setting a positive and innovative example for the future design of energy facilities. Singer brought together a design team including Blackbird Architects, William Reed (sustainable development specialist), and John Todd Research and Design (natural systems engineers) to investigate and design this alternative vision.

AES Corporation modified the Design Team’s proposal and built the AES Londonderry Granite Ridge Facility in 2001.

Alterra Institute for Environmental ResearchIBN-DLO Wageningen, Netherlands, 1999

The Alterra Institute and the Dutch government invited Michael Singer to collaborate on the design of the exterior and interior gardens for its new headquarters in Wageningen. Singer worked closely with architect Behnisch and Partner and landscape architect Copijn Tuin en Landschaps Architecten on this state of the art “green” building. The gardens function as the “lungs and kidneys” of the building, cleaning air and gray water as well as providing comfortable climate control without air-conditioning. Water is first diverted to an outdoor constructed wetland and pond. From that point it is piped into the first atrium garden pool next to the building’s library. This pool contains fish and plantings that absorb toxins. From the library pool the water is sent to the second atrium water feature for its final cleaning. This pool has a shallow-patterned concrete plate with water plants growing on its surface. The water drips into a deep cistern for storage and recycling in the building’s irrigation system. Singer’s design also provides research and experimentation sites, within the garden, for some of the environmental scientists working for the institute.

Michael Singer Studio

Grand Rapids Riverwalk FloodwallGrand Rapids, Michigan, 1988-1995

The city of Grand Rapids invited Michael Singer to propose a public artwork in a site of his choice within the city. Singer chose 600 feet of riverbank between the Pedestrian Bridge and Fulton Street as an alternative to an Army Corps of Engineers’ proposal for a sheer concrete floodwall and destruction of the old cottonwood trees along the bank. With the aid of Varusian Hagopian, Sasaki Associates’ Civil Engineer, and the City Planner, Steve Pierpoint, Singer was able to realize a reclamation, preservation and sculptural project that focuses citizen attention on a natural and historic place central to Grand Rapids. A 300-foot granite sculptural element functions as a flood wall and fully accessible walkway to the river’s edge. The sculptural flood wall is reminiscent of stone foundations from an earlier time, emerging through the steep side of the riverbank. Indigenous plantings as well as the patina of the stone encourage associations with the past. The Riverwalk Floodwall became the precedent for further development of the river’s edge and walkways in Grand Rapids.

Michael Singer Studio

Marine Transfer StationManhattan, New York, 2004

In 2004 the New York City office of Environmental Defense asked Michael Singer to investigate ways a solid waste transfer facility on the city’s waterfront could become an amenity to surrounding communities instead of blighted places with negative by-products of traffic congestion and air pollution. Mayor Bloomberg’s Solid Waste Management Plan proposes establishing a network of Marine Transfer Stations that must pass the scrutiny of community boards and the city council. Singer’s investigation revealed many strategies to transform an urban industrial waste transfer site into a place that is integral to its surrounding community in both function and form. The Phoenix, Arizona 27th Ave. Solid Waste Management Recycling Center co-designed by Singer in 1993 serves as a precedent affirming such strategies are possible.

Every aspect of the proposed Marine Transfer Station - walls, roofs, and interior spaces - supports its function. Water collected on the road and roof surfaces is stored in wall cavities for cleaning the garbage trucks and facility. Plantings along the walls and on the roof treat wastewater, remove odors through air-to-soil filtration and offer a flyway habitat stop for migrating birds. Solar photovoltaic panels generate power and reduce the facility’s energy load.

The biggest community complaint of existing facilities has been the long queue of smelly, noisy trucks in local streets. The proposal provides an automated ramp system that accommodates more than sixty trucks. Upon entering the site, drivers would be required to turn off their engines to reduce noxious emissions. In addition, the land adjoining the Marine Transfer Station could be transformed into a spacious waterfront park and gardens for public enjoyment. Some of the ample interior space could be used for community activities, educational programs and offices for local organizations.

Michael Singer Studio

Solid Waste Transfer and Recycling CenterPhoenix, Arizona, 1989–1993

Michael Singer and Linnea Glatt were hired as artists by the Phoenix Arts Commission and the Department of Public Works to provide the architectural concept design for the 27th Avenue Solid Waste Transfer and Recycling Center, a twenty-five acre, 100,000-square-foot, $18 million facility for the transfer and recycling of garbage. The artists were asked to design the site plan, landscape, architecture and structure for the facility. Singer and Glatt formed a design team with Sterling McMurrin and Richard Epstein, architectural consultants. During construction of the facility, Singer and Glatt were represented by architect Dino Sakellar to insure that the team’s design remained intact. The engineering firm Black and Veatch, Inc. addressed technical concerns and were responsible for the construction drawings and the construction administration.

Singer and Glatt’s design invites public involvement and understanding of recycling and waste issues in an infrastructure facility that would normally be closed to the public. Traditional designs of solid waste facilities promote expediency and a non-distinct design whose goal is to conceal the facility. In contrast, the Singer and Glatt design reveals the process of recycling as well as other issues related to disposal of garbage. The concepts of renewal and transformation are integral to all elements of the design: buildings, roads, landscape, water, and wildlife habitat. The project won several awards, was featured in many publications and is credited with promoting aesthetic design excellence for infrastructure in the U.S. In 1993, The New York Times chose the design as one of the eight most important architectural events of the year.

Michael Singer Studio

February 27, 2005

In My Backyard, Please: The Infrastructure Beautiful MovementBy FRED A. BERNSTEIN

TEVEN HOLL'S latest building, a water filtration plant shaped like a pipe, covered in stainless steeshingles and set in a field on the outskirts of New Haven, is hard to miss - as long as you know whe

look.

Concerned that it could attract terrorists, the South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority is tryinkeep the plant's location secret. Which is more than a little surprising. Mr. Holl - the architect of a spongdormitory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a museum in Kansas City, Mo., that resemblshards of glass - was hired by the water authority to ensure that the plant looked like no other building inworld. He complied, enclosing acres of equipment in the pipelike structure, which is so big and so shiny might be visible from Mars. The authority is not alone in teaming innovative architecture with a terribly purpose. From New Haven to Hiroshima, architects best known for signature museums and concert hallsdesigning buildings filled with tanks and filters.

"We're not back to the W.P.A. yet," said Alan Plattus, a professor of architecture at Yale, referring to theProgress Administration, the federal agency that commissioned architecturally significant public works dGreat Depression. "But we seem to be moving in that direction."

It is the Nimby phenomenon that seems to be driving the desire for something beyond concrete fortressessheds rimmed by chain-link fences. Why shout "Not in my backyard!" if your backyard can be made to ra sculpture garden?

"In an increasingly crowded world, there are more and more infrastructure buildings, and they're going toincreasingly sensitive locations," said the Boston architect Jane Weinzapfel. And often, she said, the builfar larger than anything around them. It takes architecture to tame giants.

Three years ago, Ms. Weinzapfel and her partner, Andrea Leers, began racking up awards for their "chillplant" at the University of Pennsylvania. The building is the first structure visitors see as they approach tcampus from the south. So the partners situated the cooling equipment behind a skin of folded, perforateMore or less opaque depending on lighting conditions, the skin resembles a shimmering veil.

In the Greenpoint section of Brooklyn, Richard Olcott of Polshek Partnership Architects needed more thto make visual sense of the 54-acre Newtown Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Mr. Olcott, whose besprojects include the Clinton presidential library in Little Rock, Ark., said, "You can't redesign the equipmyou can try to create an overall ordering system for the site."

The plant's most prominent feature is a cluster of 100-foot-high tanks shaped - unexpectedly - like eggs. surreal nest Mr. Olcott inserted a series of even taller stair towers, which he covered not in the expected

Page 1 of 4The New York Times > Arts > Art & Design > In My Backyard, Please: The Infrastructur...

7/29/2009http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/arts/design/27bern.html?_r=1&sq=In My Backyard, ...

concrete but in glazed parrot-green brick. The clustering of the towers recalls the Tuscan hill town of San Gimignano, a striking achievement given the facility's numbing scale and mundane purpose.

Greenpoint is a mostly industrial neighborhood. But in Connecticut, Mr. Holl's building is surrounded by stately homes. When the Regional Water Authority first proposed the plant, in the 1990's, it feared the kind of community opposition that can stall a big project for decades.

So it invited more than 1,000 neighborhood residents to a meeting. (Meter readers hand-delivered the invitations, according to Patricia Sweet, the company's spokeswoman.) At the meeting, the company essentially told residents: "If you let us build the plant here, we'll let you pick the architect." A committee composed almost entirely of community members interviewed several prominent architects before settling on Mr. Holl. Ms. Sweet noted: "It is more typical to let the engineering firm design the building."

It might seem that Mr. Holl, whose initial sketches are glorious watercolors, was an unlikely candidate for a job that is all about hydrodynamics. But he credits much of his inspiration to repeated meetings with engineers - as many as 30 at a time - to discuss topics like "flocculation" (the process by which particles form coagulated masses, or flocs).

It was all that talk of pipes, he said, that helped him settle on a building whose form "articulates what is happening inside." Not merely a metaphor, the building is also a sculpture that recalls the work of Richard Serra and Anish Kapoor.

Mr. Holl's building may resemble a tunnel, but one of the nation's biggest infrastructure projects - Boston's so-called Big Dig - is a tunnel. The new underground road that replaced the city's elevated highway required seven massive air vents. Their architects, who included Hubert Murray, of Wallace, Floyd Associates, initially called for angled chimneys and oversize louvers to ensure that passersby "read" the buildings as vents. "A building understood is going to be better liked more than a building not understood," said Mr. Murray.

Yet the custom-made louvers and the stainless steel meant to cover the chimneys were eliminated, in what Mr. Murray said was a round of cost-cutting, by the time the last vent was completed. Although he said he had come to like the stripped-down version, he added, "I am still mourning the absence of the stainless steel."

In Hiroshima, by contrast, Yoshio Taniguchi was able to lavish hundreds of millions of dollars on a new incinerator plant. Mr. Taniguchi, lionized for his ethereal expansion of the Museum of Modern Art, may not be the obvious choice for a building that handles 400 tons of trash a day. But the logic behind the commission was unassailable.

Like many cities, Hiroshima produces mountains of solid waste. If people saw how much trash they produced, city officials figured, they might produce less. So why not open the city's new plant to the public? And if that makes the incinerator a kind of museum, why not bring in Japan's premier museum architect to design it?

Mr. Taniguchi calls the building "my museum of garbage."

The prominent site, at the end of a wide boulevard connecting Hiroshima's downtown to its waterfront, demanded a building people would want to look at. And it was certain to block access to the harbor. So Mr. Taniguchi extended the boulevard with a raised glass walkway that shoots through the building

Page 2 of 4The New York Times > Arts > Art & Design > In My Backyard, Please: The Infrastructur...

7/29/2009http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/arts/design/27bern.html?_r=1&sq=In My Backyard, ...

before depositing visitors in a waterfront park.

Of course, making notable architecture - as opposed to the prefab sheds that usually encase mechanical equipment - takes money. In Hiroshima, the extra funds were allocated by a mayor determined to buff the architectural profile of a city rebuilt haphazardly after World War II.

In Connecticut, Mr. Holl said that his interventions - as well as those of the landscape architect Michael Van Valkenburgh - may have added two or three million dollars to the cost of the $49 million plant. At first, the water company's Representative Policy Board, which approves major expenditures, was reluctant to allocate the money. But then Professor Plattus of Yale made a presentation to the board on the value of design.

At a crucial moment, Ms. Sweet said, Mr. Plattus projected a photo of a banal concrete overpass on Route 95 alongside an image of one of the W.P.A.-era overpasses on the Merritt Parkway. The board "saw the difference immediately," Ms. Sweet recalled.

It is not only architects like Mr. Holl and Mr. Taniguchi who see the beauty in infrastructure. By photographing water tanks and factory smokestacks, Bernd and Hilla Becher became two of the most influential German photographers of the last 50 years. And there have been many efforts to re-use infrastructure architecturally. In London, the hugely popular Tate Modern occupies the shell of the old Bankside power station, and the museum has just announced plans to expand into an electrical substattion on the same site. On the Island of Tenerife, off the coast of Morocco, the architects Artengo-Menis-Pastrana have created an eerily beautiful performance space inside an abandoned gas tank.

In New York, infrastructure architecture has a storied past. The structures associated with the 19th-century Croton Aqueduct, including the Gatehouse at 135th Street and Convent Avenue (the subject of an exhibition opening March 1 at the Museum of the City of New York), have real architectural gravitas. Con Edison's Waterside Generating Station at 40th Street and First Avenue, built in 1905, is a stately Romanesque-style building. "They used to build them for the ages," Mr. Olcott said of New York's public works.

In the 1930's, the air vents for the Lincoln Tunnel were given heroic proportions. One of the vents is about to become the centerpiece of a new New York Waterway ferry terminal. But through much of the postwar period, infrastructure buildings were utilitarian at best. In Queens, Con Edison's Ravenswood plant, built in the 1960's, looks thrown together; its corrugated metal walls could have been ordered from a catalog.

More recently, five companies competed to build a recycling plant at the South Brooklyn Marine Terminal; one, Hugo Neu, developed its proposal with the Manhattan architects Claire Weisz and Mark Yoes, who suggested placing gently curved roofs over the recycling equipment. Neu won the bid and is now working with the city to develop final plans, yet Ms. Weisz, of the firm Weisz & Yoes, cautioned that it is too soon to know how closely the finished facility will resemble the conceptual drawings.

In the Bronx, the city is planning to build a giant water filtration plant under Van Cortlandt Park - at a cost of around $1 billion. To win community support, the city has promised that the facility will be hidden beneath a driving range.

But that may not be possible; even a subterranean plant has to have entrances and exits - part of what Charles Sturcken, of the city's Department of Environmental Protection, refers to as the "head house." No designer has yet been chosen for the head house, Mr. Sturcken said, and the project is tied up in

Page 3 of 4The New York Times > Arts > Art & Design > In My Backyard, Please: The Infrastructur...

7/29/2009http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/arts/design/27bern.html?_r=1&sq=In My Backyard, ...

litigation.

Perhaps, instead of promising invisibility, the city should propose an important work of architecture.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top

Page 4 of 4The New York Times > Arts > Art & Design > In My Backyard, Please: The Infrastructur...

7/29/2009http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/arts/design/27bern.html?_r=1&sq=In My Backyard, ...

King County Executive, Ron Sims King County Executive

Feb. 13, 2008

New Shoreline recycling and transfer station embodies King County’s green building push

Sims proposes new sustainable building policies for all county projects

Shoreline area residents will soon drop off their garbage at arguably the most environmentally friendly recycling and solid waste facilities in the nation and a model for what King County hopes to accomplish in green building at all its facilities.

King County Executive Ron Sims joined Shoreline community members and dignitaries today to celebrate the opening of the Shoreline Recycling and Transfer Station – the first transfer station built in the United States that is registered with the U.S. Green Building Council.

The transfer station officially opens for business Saturday, February 16.

"This facility is simply a magnificent embodiment of what King County wants to achieve in green building in all its construction and renovation projects," Sims said. "What's more, we were able to work with the community to create a facility that is safer, more functional and efficient, more pleasant to visit, and is helping to restore Thornton Creek."

Sims also used the occasion to propose an upgraded Green Building and Sustainable Development Ordinance for King County that requires all construction projects big and small to use sustainable building practices. The ordinance will be transmitted to King County Council tomorrow.

"No longer are there good reasons to not build green," said Sims "This facility shows that you can achieve life cycle savings through lower electricity, heating, cooling,

Page 1 of 3New Shoreline recycling and transfer station embodies King County’s green building pus...

6/12/2009http://www.metrokc.gov/exec/news/2008/0213Transfer.aspx?printver=true

water, and waste disposal costs, and from lower operations and maintenance costs. It is not only friendlier to the earth, it will save us money over time that will help keep rates low."

Formerly known as the First Northeast Transfer Station, the facility underwent a renovation ($24 million in construction costs) that makes it more efficient for users, quieter for the neighboring community, and offers increased recycling opportunities.

But what makes the facility eligible for U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) gold rating are its green features. Among them:

A roof-top rainwater harvesting system collects water to wash station floors and equipment, and to flush toilets. This reduces water needs by 57 percent, saving 254,000 gallons of drinking water every year. Solar panels generate electricity even during cloudy days and will provide up to 5 percent of the building's energy needs. The facility uses natural daylight as the primary light source through the translucent wall panels and overhead skylights, reducing energy costs by 50 percent a year. A natural ventilation system pushes air through the building, reducing energy needs for ventilation by 80 percent. Low volatile organic compound paints and adhesives contribute to healthy indoor air. Green building materials include: recycled content steel, Forest Stewardship Council-certified wood, and fly ash concrete. Landscaped bioswales slow water flow to reduce stream bank erosion along Thornton Creek, a nearby salmon-bearing stream. Plants filter contaminants and sediment from surface water runoff.

Sims said King County has demonstrated its commitment to sustainable building practices since the construction in 1999 of the King Street Center, one of the first green office buildings in Seattle. In 2005, the King County Council approved Sims' green building policy requiring all King County buildings, renovations, and remodel projects seek LEED certification.

"That ordinance is now expiring, which is why tomorrow I am introducing to the Council a new Green Building Ordinance that enhances our green building policies and sustainability goals," he said.

Statistics show that green buildings that use the LEED rating system cost on average 0 to 2 percent more to build than traditional construction. However, a sustainably built structure can save a significant amount of money over the life of the building. Long-term financial benefits due to reduced operating, maintenance and other costs, however, exceed additional design and construction costs by a factor of 10 to 1.

Sims said the new Green Building Ordinance raises the bar in a number of ways, requiring, among other upgrades, that King County:

Ensure all projects big and small use green building practices. Conduct energy audits and achieve energy savings for all county buildings. Develop green guidelines for building operations and maintenance.

Page 2 of 3New Shoreline recycling and transfer station embodies King County’s green building pus...

6/12/2009http://www.metrokc.gov/exec/news/2008/0213Transfer.aspx?printver=true

Updated: Feb. 15, 2008

King County | News | Services | Contact | Search

Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

© 2009 King County

King County currently has 16 buildings either in design, under construction or completed that are registered with LEED. The buildings that have already attained LEED certification are the Kent Pullen Regional Communication and Emergency Coordination Center, King Street Center, and Power Distribution Headquarters, and Marymoor Maintenance Facility.

"We hope these efforts inspire everyone to develop sustainably and build green to help balance growth with protection of our region's valuable resources," Sims said. "Addressing global warming is a top priority, and green, sustainable building and development, done collectively throughout King County and its cities will help address our environmental concerns while getting us on the path to smart growth."

King County provides green building assistance for residents, businesses and other agencies throughout the county. Through its GreenTools program, the county offers training, financial incentives and grants, research, project review, and strategies and policies to support green building on a large scale. With free consultations and fee discounts, King County's Department of Development and Environmental Services provides incentives for builders and developers to use sustainable development techniques.

King County's Solid Waste Division, which operates the new Shoreline Recycling andTransfer Station, also operates nine other transfer facilities throughout the county and a regional landfill in Maple Valley. The division offers a wide range of recycling and solid waste services to residents and businesses and works in partnership with cities and other stakeholders to protect health, safety and the environment.

Learn more

Video about the new station Photo gallery of opening King County's green building programs King County Solid Waste Division

Page 3 of 3New Shoreline recycling and transfer station embodies King County’s green building pus...

6/12/2009http://www.metrokc.gov/exec/news/2008/0213Transfer.aspx?printver=true