Click images to view full size

The Christman Building

Lansing, Michigan

Project Type: Office

Volume 39 Number 12

July–September 2009

Case Number: C039012

PROJECT TYPE

The Christman Building—a 64,190-square-foot (5,963-sq-m) Class A office

building—is a sustainable retrofit of the 80-year-old Mutual Building in downtown

Lansing, Michigan. The renovation has made the Christman Building the world’s

first double-Platinum LEED certification, for both Core and Shell (CS) and

Commercial Interiors (CI). Part of a larger $1 billion effort to redevelop downtown

Lansing, the project consolidates the operations of the Christman Company, a full-

service real estate firm, in a single sustainable location.

LOCATION

Central Business District

SITE SIZE

0.5 acre/0.2 hectare

LAND USES

Office Building

KEYWORDS/SPECIAL FEATURES

Green Building

Brownfield

Redevelopment

Renovation

Historic Preservation

Adaptive Use

WEB SITE

www.christmanco.com

OWNER/DEVELOPER

Christman Capital Development Group, LLC

Lansing, Michigan

517-482-1488

www.christmanco.com

ARCHITECT/LIGHTING/INTERIOR DESIGNER

SmithGroup, Inc.

Ann Arbor, Michigan

734-662-4457

www.smithgroup.com

GENERAL CONTRACTOR

The Christman Company

Lansing, Michigan

517-482-1488

www.christmanco.com

MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

SmithGroup, Inc.

Ann Arbor, Michigan

734-662-4457

www.smithgroup.com

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The Christman Building, formerly known as the Mutual Building, is a six-story, 64,190-square-foot (5,963-sq-m)

Class A office building in downtown Lansing, Michigan. This 80-year-old edifice, which is listed on the National

Register of Historic Places, had been poorly maintained for 20 years and had been vacant for the three years

before its purchase by the Christman Company, a locally based real estate company whose services include

development, construction management, general contracting, and design. Christman has been headquartered in

Lansing since 1918 and operating out of the same building since 1927. Company leaders were eager for additional

space to house their growing operations, to display their commitment to sustainable design and historic

preservation, to demonstrate the effectiveness of integrated design and construction strategies, and to show that it

was possible to deliver a financially competitive historic office renovation. Rather than erecting a new office

building on a greenfield site in the suburbs, Christman chose to engage in a restoration project and contribute to

emerging growth in Lansing’s downtown.

DEVELOPMENT BACKGROUND

Christman was also eager to contribute to the revitalization of its hometown. Lansing, a former automotive center,

had been suffering for years as General Motors and other big corporations scaled back operations or closed down

altogether. However, economic incentives and imaginative builders had begun to reshape the city’s downtown

area. The Mutual Building rehabilitation became part of a nearly $1 billion effort to revitalize Lansing. The

Christman Company provides development services through its real estate development division, Christman

Capital Development Company (CCDC). CCDC owns the Christman Building, with the Christman Company leasing

the top three floors as its national headquarters. Additional tenants include the Michigan Municipal League, a state

association for local governments, located on the first floor, and Kelley Cawthorne, a governmental relations and

lobbying firm, on the third floor.

In rehabilitating the Mutual Building, the Christman Company wanted to create a living case study showcasing

some of the firm’s strengths: historical preservation, sustainable construction, and development of Class A office

buildings. It took $12 million, two years of planning, and nearly a full year of actual physical construction to

complete this project. The renovation made the Christman Building the world’s first and only “double-Platinum”

LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified building, for both Core and Shell (CS) and

Commercial Interiors (CI).

DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

From project inception, it was Christman’s goal to build a sustainable, high-quality, historic preservation project

and attain LEED-CS certification. Throughout the process, the company used LEED checklists to monitor progress,

as opposed to designing to the LEED checklists. When it became apparent that the structure could achieve

Platinum certification for both CS and CI, Christman began to actively pursue some of the credits that were within

reach and that required minimal additional cost. LEED construction guidelines were tied to the contracts of all trade

contractors.

Preplanning was a key aspect of the renovation. For over a decade, Christman has been a strong proponent of

construction waste recycling. The tight urban site, however, limited the number of Dumpster spaces available for

on-site separation. Upfront planning with the trade contractors ensured that materials were separated on the floors

and then deposited into the appropriate Dumpsters on given days. Nearby parking spaces were temporarily used

for Dumpster locations for a short period of time. The project was able to achieve a recycling rate of more than 77

percent.

The commissioning and certification of the project were completed in house. LEED planning was facilitated by

Christman’s full-time sustainable programs manager, who was integrally involved in the design phase of the

project. He was able to add a “sustainable filter” to the design process to ensure that sustainable materials, energy

efficiency, improved ventilation, and improved daylighting were key parts of the final design. The LEED certification

process was managed internally by the sustainable programs manager with assistance from the architects and

engineers.

Commissioning was undertaken by Christman’s technical staff; the commissioning team was also involved in the

project from the earliest stages of design.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHALLENGES

For sustainable historic preservation, the biggest challenge is determining how to complete a sustainable, energy-

efficient retrofit of an existing building using modern architectural designs, without compromising visual, historical,

or structural integrity, a U.S. Secretary of the Interior criterion for new construction within historic structures.

Working with historic preservation specialists on the design team, painstaking precautions were taken to ensure

the integrity of the building’s historical aspects, dimensions, exterior enclosure, and monumental stairwells and

hall spaces.

All preservation work on the building was approved by Michigan’s State Historic Preservation Office and the

National Park Service to certify that standards protecting the National Register building were upheld and to permit

receipt of federal and state historic preservation tax credits. The addition of the sixth floor and the enclosure of the

new atrium were delicate design issues for the National Park Service and required extensive detailing adjustments

to achieve consensus as to the amount of glass to be utilized and the setback at interface points to the historic

structure.

All historic surface refinishing was performed through a process common to good preservation, which included the

use of the least abrasive and smallest amount of chemicals possible. Historic surfaces such as the original

bluestone flooring and walnut millwork were uncovered from remodeling performed during the 1970s. With only

minor repair and restoration, these materials were put back into service with the goal that they should last for

another 50 years. Period ceramic tile in the main stairway, which had been damaged from previous work, was

patched and hand painted to match original material, in lieu of total replacement.

Most of the exterior masonry was in reasonably good shape, but in the years the building was vacant, moisture

had entered from multiple locations in the roof, and water, age, and corrosion had taken their collective toll on the

upper levels. To correct for the absence of expansion joints—a flaw in the original design—virtually all the stone

from the top of the fifth-floor windows to the parapet was removed, reinforced, and reset. The original exterior

brick walls of the structure were cleaned and tuckpointed to exacting historic preservation standards.

Because of historic preservation requirements, the glass in the restored windows had to be completely clear;

though insulated, windows could not have a low-E film coating. The need to maintain the “breathability” of exterior

walls limited the opportunity to add wall insulation. This resulted in slightly higher usage of heating and cooling

than would be found in a new structure. Nonetheless, Christman was able to add six inches (15 cm) of insulation

and a white roof to the building to reduce energy use and to offset urban heat-island effects, allowing energy

efficiency to be greatly improved.

GREEN BUILDING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

The Mutual Building was constructed in 1928 with a solid concrete frame. The original design included several

features that are now considered green friendly, including tall windows and an open floor plate for substantial

daylighting. The building features a U-shaped layout on floors two through five which, in essence, served as a

“light court” to further facilitate daylighting. All these aspects of the original design were incorporated into the

green features of the restored building. Reuse of the historic structure tapped the inherent embodied energy of the

existing building, which is the most resource-efficient method of creating new space.

Project results demonstrate that sustainability is compatible with historic renovation. Energy modeling projections

for the Christman Building show that it will exceed minimum energy efficiency requirements by 34 percent. Water

savings are estimated at 40 percent. Ninety-two percent of the building’s wall, roof, and floors was reused, and 77

percent of construction debris was recycled.

Sustainable Siting. The Christman Building is well located for environmentally friendly commuting:

Proximity to mass transit. The Christman Building’s location facilitates the use of existing parking facilities and public transportation. The downtown hub for the Capital Area Transportation Authority (CATA), which in 2007 was named the best transit system of its size in North America by the American Public Transportation Association, is less than five blocks away.

Encouragement of green commuting. The provision of bike racks, showers, and locker facilities encourages

building occupants to walk, run, or bike to work.

Sustainable Design and Construction Practices. The Christman Building renovation incorporated the following

green design and construction practices:

Flexible building interiors and collaborative space. One of the project’s important design criteria was to

plan for growth, change, and the accommodation of short-term, on-site project personnel. Glass-walled offices are placed along the perimeter of the building to meet the need for privacy without separating these rooms physically from collaborative areas. The interior design kept fixed walls to a minimum, and demountable wall dividers on the new sixth floor allow the space to be adapted for use by function and number of people. The building atrium was created between the two rear extensions of this U-shaped structure on floors four and five, and is accessible to all Christman staff. This inner courtyard and large

exterior windows provide daylight to the interior space. The inner courtyard also acts as an informal gathering and collaboration area. The space, called Christman Square, has become a popular place to work because of its natural light and architectural character.

Recycling demolition waste. During the demolition phase of the project, all carpet squares in the building were saved and donated to Habit for Humanity. All ceiling tiles were sent to Armstrong Industries to be

recycled into new ceiling tiles. All wood used in the LEED-CS project was certified by the Forest Stewardship Council. Drywall was donated to be used as an additive for road construction projects. A comprehensive reclamation and recycling program during construction provided on-site recycling containers, and recycled materials were sent to specific recycling centers. These focused efforts diverted 77 percent of the project’s interior construction waste from the local landfill.

Maintenance of indoor air quality. During construction, an indoor air quality plan was instituted to ensure the use of environmentally sensitive materials and construction practices, and to reduce any adverse air quality effects once the building was occupied. Measures undertaken during construction included dust control and covering all return air grilles with temporary MERV-8 filters. The air-handling systems use a MERV-13–rated air filtration system to create a healthier work environment. (MERV, or minimum efficiency

report value, is measured from 1 to 16; the higher the rating, the more efficient the air filter is at removing particles.) The heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system installed was designed to substantially exceed the minimum indoor air quality requirements set by code. The under-floor air distribution system, installed on floors two through six, provides 200 to 300 percent more ventilation to the breathing zone than conventional systems, as required by American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 62.1–2004. Installation and keeping under-floor air

system space clean during construction proved to be a real challenge because of the debris generated by some of the historic preservation activities, such as plaster restoration. Even though all the joints of the access floor panels were duct-taped to keep out the dust, the space under the access floor had to be cleaned several additional times to ensure that the supply air space was clean.

Energy Efficiency. The Christman Building project was designed to enhance energy efficiency in a historic

structure. The following “energy-smart” strategies were utilized:

Efficient HVAC systems. Heating and cooling systems were designed and equipment was selected to minimize energy use while providing individually controlled comfort conditions. The under-floor air distribution system is more energy efficient than conventional ducted systems. A computerized building

management system (BMS) ensures that the HVAC system operates so as to maximize energy efficiency and occupant comfort. Commissioning of all HVAC, lighting, and domestic water systems was conducted upon building completion to make sure that all systems operated as designed and as efficiently as possible.

Energy-efficient lighting. Featuring large perimeter windows and the aforementioned interior courtyard,

the Christman Building provides daylight to 92 percent of occupied spaces and outside views to 90 percent of the occupants. The building earned two LEED daylighting points for 75 and 95 percent of spaces having a daylighting factor of 2 percent or more. Even on the cloudiest days, the Christman Building does not get a daytime reading of less than 75 foot-candles. This degree of daylighting allowed designers to keep interior indirect light levels at the low end of the spectrum, at around 30 foot-candles. Lighting levels are controlled by occupancy sensors in private offices and stairways, programmed timers in common spaces,

and individually controlled task lighting. Overall, the effect of extensive daylighting and efficient fixtures means that lighting energy savings are projected to be 27 percent less than a code building.

Use of Energy Star–rated equipment and appliances. All appliances and office equipment, including copiers, fax machines, and computers, are Energy Star rated. All cooling equipment uses refrigerants that cause minimal damage to the environment.

Sustainable building control system. The Christman Building features a digital BMS with several thousand control points. The system is used to continuously fine-tune the operation of HVAC and lighting systems, with the current occupancy and climatic conditions. This system maximizes both energy efficiency and

occupant comfort. The BMS tracks and measures electricity and gas usage, as well as atmospheric conditions inside and outside the structure, and is used to prompt maintenance activities. Energy use is metered at the building and tenant levels to encourage conservation. The BMS is also programmed to provide automatic alarms when any of the systems are operating outside of their programmed parameters. This results in prompt response from maintenance personnel, which in turn maintains a high

level of energy conservation. Thermal, ventilation, and lighting systems can be controlled at every workstation and in every conference room by individual climate controls, floor registers, and task lighting.

Renewable energy credits (RECs). RECs were purchased for clean wind energy from Renewable Choice Energy, a Green-e–certified company. The RECs were purchased to offset conventional electricity use for two years for 70 percent of the building’s common area and for all of the Christman Company’s space. The

RECs cost $3,624 for a two-year contract. The purchase of RECs to offset the use of 843,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity reduces carbon emissions by 1.5 million pounds per year, sulfur emissions by more than 4,500 grams per year, and nitrogen emissions by more than 2,100 grams per year.

Water Efficiency. The following strategies were undertaken to cut water use at the Christman Building:

Reduced potable water consumption. A 40 percent reduction in potable water and sewage use was achieved through careful selection of water-efficient plumbing: fixtures such as 0.5-gallon-per-flush automatic flush urinals, 0.5-gallon-per-flush ultra-low-flow automatic lavatory faucets with aerators, and

dual-flush toilet valves throughout the building. In addition, the faucets at the coffee stations have low-flow aerators installed and the two showers are equipped with one-gallon-per-flush showerheads.

Landscaping. Drought-resistant plants were chosen for the exterior landscaping, so that no potable irrigation would be required.

Sustainable, Reused, and Recycled Materials. The design and construction teams carried out an extensive and successful program to employ sustainable, reused, and recycled materials throughout the project:

Reuse of building materials. The design reused 92 percent of the structural walls, roof, and floors. Some

original building components were also refurbished and reused. The project reused the following materials: o Existing walnut trim moldings and office furniture were removed, rehabilitated, and reused in

different locations. o Antique millstones from the original owner—an insurer of the state’s grain farmers—had been

incorporated in the sidewalk in front of the building. These were carefully extracted when the

sidewalk was replaced and are now featured in the landscaping along the facade. o Door hardware was removed, polished, or replated and reinstalled. o Metal components of the light fixtures were cleaned, new mica shades were installed, and the

fixtures were converted electrically to be energy efficient. o The main entrance doors and plaques, the Pewabic wall tiles—a vintage Arts and Crafts School tile

much in demand in the Detroit area—and bronze handrails in the main hall and stairwell were

restored. o Bluestone and linoleum floors were restored to meet historic preservation standards. o Wood windows were restored with the addition of insulated glazing. o Bricks salvaged from the removal of the penthouse were used to patch exterior walls. o Plaster walls were restored, using several restoration techniques, preventing their complete

demolition and replacement. Use of recycled, regional, and environmentally friendly materials. Recycled and regionally manufactured

materials were used extensively, as were low-emission sealants, paints, carpets, and furniture. Benign products, such as citrus strippers, wet grinding, and coatings with low emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), were used to restore historic finishes such as the walnut paneling in the executive offices on the first floor. Carpet tiles were installed so that small sections, such as high-traffic areas, can

be replaced as needed. Recycled materials made up 20 percent of the materials costs for the LEED-CS project, and 25 percent for the LEED-CI project. Regionally manufactured materials (10 percent extracted) accounted for 42 percent of total materials costs for the LEED-CS project, and 24 percent for the LEED-CI project. All wood used in the project was certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.

FINANCING

The Christman Building is a public/private partnership between the Christman Company and the city of Lansing,

which, through its Brownfield Authority, has a development agreement with the project. This enables the recapture

of Michigan single-business tax credits for eligible costs associated with the project. The city also provided key

economic information that supported requests for the new markets tax credits. The city of Lansing, knowing that a

healthy downtown leads to healthy communities, was eager to assist in the development.

The financing for the project utilized a number of economic incentives, including federal programs such as new

markets tax credits and historic tax credits, which help urban projects move forward when traditional financing is

not adequate. New markets tax credits provide federal tax credits over a seven-year period to qualified commercial

investment properties. In order to qualify, the project must be within a Qualified Census Tract as defined by the

U.S. Treasury. The competitiveness of the application process often requires projects to show extra characteristics

of how the project is helping the community; in the case of the Mutual Building rehabilitation project, it was the

fact that the structure was also designated a brownfield site by the city of Lansing.

The project was also facilitated by real property tax relief through the federal Obsolete Property Rehabilitation Act

(OPRA), a program that freezes the pre-rehabilitated taxable value on a structure for 12 years. This enables

builders and developers to invest more money into rehabilitations and renovations and pass the savings along to

tenants in the form of lower operating costs. To qualify, a company must be working on a commercial property or

building that is blighted or deemed functionally obsolete, and submit an OPRA request to the city—in this case, the

city of Lansing—which grants the application.

The economic incentives that supported the redevelopment of the Christman Building included the following:

$672,500 in Michigan brownfield single-business tax credits; $2 million in federal historic tax credits; $500,000 in state historic tax credits; Allocation of $8.5 million in federal new market qualified investment; and $1.2 million ($100,000 per year for 12 years) in property tax relief through the establishment of a federal

OPRA district.

While the renovation of the Christman Building attracted significant public support for its urban redevelopment and

historic components, green features were not a material factor in project costs and no financial incentives were

received specifically for the LEED-related costs. For the LEED-CS project, the costs associated with achieving green

goals represented 1.3 percent of the total budget. Two-thirds of those costs were related to the LEED certification

process. For the LEED-CI project, the costs associated with achieving LEED certification represented 0.7 percent of

the total budget. Of those green costs, 95 percent were related to LEED certification. The minimization of

additional project costs was a direct result of employing a fully integrated design and construction process and

using the LEED process to measure how the project performed on a sustainable scale, as opposed to designing

specifically to the LEED checklists.

MARKETING AND MANAGEMENT

The Christman Building has proved to be a marketing tool for the Christman Company, and occupant satisfaction

with the project’s green features is high. Ongoing management of the property has also been influenced by

sustainable objectives, as demonstrated by the introduction of a green housekeeping program.

Marketing benefits. The Christman Building serves as a high-profile, living example of what an

environmentally oriented construction firm can accomplish. As such, the structure itself serves as a marketing tool for the company. Public interest in this green historic preservation project continues to be high as of October 2009. Visitors to the facility learn about sustainable design and construction through permanent signage and tours guided by Christman staff. Media exposure has run the gamut, from trade

magazines to Web sites to television and radio news features. Dozens of local, statewide, and national media covered the story, as did a green news outlet in the United Kingdom.

Occupant satisfaction. Christman volunteered to be a case study subject for a Michigan State University

research project that is evaluating the health benefits of working in a LEED structure, and the building’s staff will be surveyed approximately every three months for the first two years of occupancy. The initial two surveys found that occupants’ responses to the green features were overwhelmingly positive.

Green housekeeping. The Christman Company developed detailed specifications for a green housekeeping program. The program stipulates the use of environmentally responsible and low-emission

cleaning products, and utilizes 100 percent recycled paper products in restrooms. All janitorial and chemical storage rooms are separated and exhausted directly to the outside, and entrance mats catch outdoor debris before it enters the building. The building also has a comprehensive recycling program in which 14 different types of materials are recycled.

EXPERIENCE GAINED

The Christman Building renovation offers the following lessons for teams engaged in sustainable historic

preservation or renovation projects:

Historic preservation and sustainable renovation can be complementary. The original design of the Christman Building, which incorporated tall windows and an open floor plate, facilitated daylighting—an energy-saving feature—as well as the provision of outside views to occupants. Energy modeling projections for the structure show that it will exceed minimum energy efficiency requirements by 34

percent. Ninety-two percent of existing walls, roofs, and flooring was reused and 77 percent of demolition waste was recycled. Water savings are estimated at 40 percent.

High-level sustainable design and construction do not need to cost significantly more than conventional

practices provided that an integrated design and construction process is used. For the LEED-CS project, the costs associated with achieving green goals represented 1.3 percent of the total budget. Two-thirds of those costs were related to the LEED certification process. For the LEED-CI project, the costs associated with achieving LEED certification represented 0.7 percent of the total budget. Of those green costs, 95 percent were related to LEED certification.

Financing incentives from a variety of federal and state programs were assembled to support the Christman Building renovation. Developers can frequently couple public and private financing to make green and historic renovations more affordable. It is worthwhile to investigate public as well as private financing sources when embarking on a green or historic renovation.

Early planning is crucial when using the integrated design and construction process. Commitment to the LEED approach and collaboration among the owner, project team, and subcontractors are essential to success.

Begin to gather required LEED documentation very early in the project, as it is difficult to get the subcontractors to supply the data required at the end of the project. To that end, Christman has developed a broad range of tools to facilitate receiving and documenting the information required for LEED

certification.

Ongoing evaluation of energy use efficiency measures and perpetual tracking of consumption information are crucial to ensure that a project of this nature attains the projected energy savings.

Interest in sustainable construction and historic preservation is not limited to architecture, design, and construction circles. The Christman Building renovation has attracted media attention and served as a marketing tool for the Christman Company. The experience suggests that projects that combine historic

preservation and sustainability are likely to attract significant attention.

PROJECT DATA

LAND USE INFORMATION

Site area (acres/hectares): 0.5/0.2

Gross floor area (square feet/square meters): 64,190/5,963

Number of levels: 6

Number of parking spaces: No additional parking spaces.

LAND USE PLAN

Use Area (Acres/Hectares) Percentage of Site

Buildings 0.23/0.09 46

Landscaping/other 0.27/0.11 54

Total 0.5/0.2 100

DEVELOPMENT COST INFORMATION

Site Acquisition Cost: $1,000,000

Total Development Cost: $12,000,000

DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

Site acquired: April 2006

Planning started: April 2006

Construction started: February 2007

Project opened: February 2008

Project completed: February 2008

DRIVING DIRECTIONS

From Capital City Airport: Head south on Dewitt Road, and continue on North Logan Street/Martin Luther King

Boulevard for three miles (4.8 km). Turn left on West Saginaw Street. Turn right on North Capitol Avenue;

destination will be on the left.

Driving time: 13 minutes in nonpeak traffic.

Bonney Mayers, James M. Cash, Gavin L. Gardi, and Ronald D. Staley, report authors

Theodore Thoerig, editor, Development Case Studies

David James Rose, copy editor

Colleen DiPietro, online production

This Development Case Study is intended to serve as a resource for subscribers in improving the quality of future projects. Data

contained herein were made available by the project’s development team and constitute a report on, not an endorsement of, the

project by ULI–the Urban Land Institute.

Copyright © 2009 by ULI–the Urban Land Institute

1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W., Suite 500 West, Washington, D.C. 20007-5201

The Christman Building—a 64,190-square-foot (5,963-sq-m) Class A office building—is a sustainable

retrofit of the 80-year-old Mutual Building in downtown Lansing, Michigan.

The $12 million project, developed by the Christman Company—a Lansing-based full-service real estate company—achieved the world’s first double-Platinum LEED certification, for both Core and Shell (CS) and Commercial Interiors (CI).

The high-level sustainable design and construction did not cost significantly more than a

conventional building: less than 1.3 percent of the total project budget was associated with implementing green design elements.

Energy modeling projections for the Christman Building show that it will exceed minimum energy-

efficiency requirements by 34 percent. In this project, 92 percent of existing walls, roofs, and flooring were reused; 77 percent of demolition waste was recycled; and water savings are estimated at 40 percent.

Historic preservation and sustainable renovation can be complementary; for example, the original design of the structure, which incorporated tall windows and an open floor plate, facilitated day lighting—an energy-saving feature.