Architects, contractors, designers and owners must take integrated approach to sustainability

The increasing popularity of green building has a positive effect on more than just the environment, as architects, contractors, designers and owners take an integrated approach to sustainability.

In a traditional design-build process, each step, from the design of the structure to decisions about what materials to use to the engineering of mechanical systems, is undertaken separately, said Myron Willson, director of sustainable design with Salt Lake City-based MHTN Architects. The problems with this system are many. The way an architect designed a building, for example, might not accommodate the HVAC system designed by an engineer, or vice versa.

Our work is not as independent as we like to think it is," Willson said. "To make truly well-informed decisions, it's important to bring people together before the process starts."

Early communication is especially important for green buildings, as they must be designed wholistically to achieve benefits such as water and energy savings, improved indoor air quality or the use of recyclable materials, said David Brems, principal architect with Salt Lake City's GSBS Architects. "Anyone who has a stake in the process and the outcome, we want them to be involved in the process from the beginning," he said.

There are as many ways to go green as there are buildings, so part of an architect's job is to measure the available sustainable methods against the goal of going green, Brems said. The goal for a school built with green standards might be to measurably improve test scores, in which case bringing in and optimizing natural light should be the focus, as studies show that good natural light alone can raise test scores as much as 25 percent. Or, a developer who wants lower operating costs should focus money and other resources on more efficient mechanical systems within the building.

Often, an architect works closely with a developer or building owner to articulate those goals, and then determines how green building practices can help meet them. Only between 5 and 10 percent of MHTN's clients come in asking for green, Willson said, "And even when they do, they might not know what that means."

Many clients still have the perception that going green is more expensive than traditional building, though that is not always the case. If a building is built using traditional methods and then retrofitted with green elements, it can be anywhere from 1 to 5 percent more expensive in the long-run, Willson said. But, the same building can be constructed for the same budget as a traditional building if green elements are incorporated from the beginning.

"The downside is that if people don't understand, or if you get it to late, yes, there is a cost," Willson said.

To avoid that circumstance, architects encourage their clients to go green from the start. MHTN developed software that breaks down the cost of individual green practices so stakeholders can make an educated decision about what works best for them and their building. Some elements, such as increased insulation or more energy-efficient glass, can pay for themselves in as little as six months, Brems said, while more extensive practices, such as photovoltaics or solar energy, might take a little longer.

Green buildings have what is, essentially, a triple bottom line, Brems said. They cost less to operate, the occupants are happier and anyone looking to relocate a business or build or buy a home will always choose a green building over a non-green building, even when the real estate market is down, he said. Insurance is also lower on green buildings, and banks are more interested in lending for sustainable development.

"It's not just talk. It's documented," Brems said.

Much of the documentation about the benefits of green buildings comes from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, which provides a point system for certifying green buildings worldwide. While there is a cost to developers to certify buildings, it is usually only a small percentage of the total project cost, and is always money well spent.

Most of the time people are interested in being overt about it, having the public or their users or whatever know," Willson said, and certification also makes it difficult to cut corners. "Doing the LEED thing really keeps everyone honest."

LEED standards are reliable and measurable, Brems said, and up to a Silver LEED certification can be obtained with no increase to the cost of the building, as long as special attention is paid to simple design elements such as site orientation or windows.

"It's going up all the time," Brems said of the number of LEED-certified buildings. "People are recognizing what the LEED program is and recognizing it's not a big deal. It's a different way of thinking, and they're not afraid to go in that direction."

Some points in the LEED rating system, such as installing a bike rack and showers so people can cycle to work, are fairly easy to achieve, while others, such as installing new mechanical systems, can be more time- and cost-consuming. The system is intended to have a good balance of easy and more difficult requirements, and to be fair to every locale, though this is not always the case. It is difficult, for example, to acquire regional materials in Utah for many types of structures, Brems said, though the way points are weighted theoretically evens everything out in the end.