Measured Approaches to Sustainability

The implementation of sustainable, or ‘green’ design planning during early phases of project study and design is an important decision, and is consistent with many city and statewide initiatives. Adoption of a sustainable approach during the earliest phases of feasibility study permits a clear definition of the parameters under which the owners and architects work to establish objectives and requirements for the project. This is an opportunity to define and implement a sustainable framework that guides the feasibility and planning before and during design phases. This framework may take several forms depending on the rigor and familiarity of project participants, which are generally grouped into three categories described below. Each of the categories has a range that may at times overlap.

The most rigorous and potentially most costly includes adoption of the LEED Certification standards for New Construction. LEED Certification permits a recognized framework to be adopted against which building planning, design and performance are measured. The framework criteria are best established in the earliest stages of a building project, ideally when programmatic alternatives and hard costs are being determined (as in the DCAM study process). The benefits of this process include formal recognition and outside verification of sustainability measures. Other standards may also be adopted in a manner similar to LEED, and Energy Star certification may also be established as a goal for the building project.

There are middle-ground approaches to sustainability that include the adoption of LEED-like standards that maintain a similar checklist of sustainable criteria, but with more flexibility to accommodate project or campus-specific objectives or limitations. These standards are often generated among project leaders in concert with long range objectives. This eliminates the cost and risk of third-party standards verification but also eliminates formal outside recognition. Many large corporations, states, and universities have established objectives along these lines as a way to quantify sustainable objectives in a manner consistent with the specific nature of their operations.

Sustainability also may be, and often is practiced at a less rigorous level that is driven by specific concerns and operational requirements that override more formal establishment of standards. While budgets may preclude extensive sustainable measures, many building owners and operators upgrade physical infrastructure based on occupant health concerns, routine maintenance, marginal technology improvements, and regulatory requirements. The ‘less rigorous’ standards are often predicated on a requirement that there be little or no additional first cost for implementation.

Any of these three basic approaches may become preferable based on schedule, budget, environmental and community stewardship, or other goals. The impact of commiting to a particular pathway as specifically feasible as possible at an early point in project planning stage allows for the most integrated choices to be considered and to provide opportunities for the broadest range of solutions with the least impact on overall costs and schedule.

Utilizing a clear framework for sustainable design planning during the earliest possible planning or design phase is an important component for designing a project that addresses facility needs, stewards the orgnaization's leadership in environmentally responsive design, and clearly defines the path for this project to follow as it navigates through the remaining phases and on to the construction process.

AGB 5/2005