What we've been reading about LEED certification in the past week:

  • The Philadelphia Inquirer looks at commercial landlords' divergent attitudes re: LEED certification. No surprises here -- some landlords have no use for it, while others are scrambling to get approval from the green powers that be. The article doesn't really scratch much below the surface, unfortunately, largely failing to explain or reconcile the differences -- e.g., why some tenants favor LEED certification and others don't feel the need to lobby their landlords for it, or if there's something other than tenant demand (such as tax benefits) driving the certification efforts. The article's timing is keyed to the first LEED-EB (Existing Building) certification in Philadelphia for an existing multi-tenant structure, achieved by 1601 Market Street.
  • Frank Gehry is among those who are skeptical of the benefits of LEED certfication, according to this post from BusinessWeek's Next:Innovation and Design blog. At a recent Chicago function, the renowned architect complained that LEED credits are given for "bogus stuff" and that the cost of compliance outweighed the benefits.
  • WRC Channel 4 Washington notes that the Twin Cities' Target Field, new home of the Minnesota Twins, has surpassed Washington's Nationals Park as the "greenest" stadium in baseball. The new ballpark has attained LEED Silver status, and scored two points higher than the home of the Nats, which is also LEED Silver. The additional cost associated with certification has been reported by the St. Paul Pioneer-Press to be just $2 million on a $545 million project, less than one percent of the total project cost. Target Field might not be the greenest for long: the new stadium being built for the Florida Marlins will also seek LEED Silver certification, so it could potentially accrue more points than Target Field