2. Introduction
The key to creating a high-performance green building is the ability of the design team to
understand and apply the concept of ecological or green design.
Green building assessment systems such as LEED allow an uneducated design team to create a
high-performance building by simply following the checklist.
However, not possessing a higher understanding of ecological design (natural systems and their
behavior) may create building stereotypes that stagnate rather than advance the art of green
building.
3. Introduction
Particular problems and questions:
◦ What can be learned from nature and ecology that can be applied to buildings?
◦ Should ecology serve as model or metaphor for green buildings?
◦ How can natural systems be directly incorporated to improve the functioning of the built environment?
◦ How can the human-nature interface best be managed for the benefit of both systems?
◦ When does the natural system metaphor break down, and, if it does, what are the alternative
approaches?
4. Design vs. Ecological Design
In its simplest form, design can be defined as “…the intentional shaping of matter, energy, and
process to meet a perceived end or desire.”
It is clear that this human designed and engineered landscape often replaces the natural
landscape with unrecyclable and toxic products produced by wasteful industrial processes that
were implemented with little regard for the consequences for humans or ecological systems.
Ecological design can be defined as – that which transforms matter and energy using processes
that are compatible and synergistic with nature and that are modeled on natural systems.
The disconnect between human design and nature is precisely the problem that high-
performance green building seeks to address.
5. Design vs. Ecological Design
Contemporary ecological designers are engaged in a struggle on several fronts in their attempt to
shift to a form of thinking that would reconnect humans and nature.
◦ Understanding ecology and its applicability to the built environment.
◦ Determining how to use nature as the model and/or metaphor for design.
◦ Coping with an industrial production system that operates using conventional thinking.
◦ Reversing at least two centuries of design that used the machine as its model and metaphor: “The house is a
machine for living in.” -Architect, Le Corbusier
Benefits of Ecological Design
◦ Page 90
6. Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)
Fuller’s designs emphasized resource
conservation, use of renewable energy, use of
lightweight materials, and the concept of
deconstruction.
His geodesic dome has been called the
lightest, strongest, and most cost-effective
structure ever devised.
His work influenced many of today’s green
building movement participants.
Sometimes referred to as the “father of
environmental design.”
7. Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)
Author of Operating Manual for Spaceship
Earth (1969) and Critical Path (1981).
Critical Path explored social issues including
environment, economics, and humans.
Later labeled, Sustainable Design, by Lester
Brown.
9. Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1958)
Developed some of the first ideas about
nature and building.
“Organic Architecture”
“No house should ever be on a hill or on
anything. It should be of the hill. Belonging to
it. Hill and house should live together, each
the happier for the other.”
Wright’s goal was to create buildings that were
integral to the site, environment, life of the
inhabitants, and to the nature of the materials.
11. Richard Neutra (1892-1970)
Student of Wright’s.
Recognized how flawed the products of
human creation were compared to those of
nature. Human artifacts were static and
unable to self-regenerate or self-adjust.
One of the first to recognize the concept of
biophilia, and the connection between health
and nature.
Advocated the close connection of living
spaces to the “green world of the organic.”
13. Other historical leaders
Lewis Mumford (1895-1990)
◦ Known for his writings on cities and architecture.
◦ Architectural critic at The New Yorker for 30
years.
◦ Wrote, The Brown Decades in 1931.
◦ Wrote, Values for Survival in 1946.
◦ Wrote, The Myth of the Machine in 1967.
Ian McHarg (1920-2001)
◦ Wrote, Design with Nature in 1969.
Malcolm Wells (1926-)
◦ Wrote, Gentle Architecture in 1981.
◦ Father of earth-sheltered architecture, or
underground dwellings.
John Lyle (1934-1998)
◦ Wrote, Design for Human Ecosystems in 1985.
◦ Pursued the goal of creating regenerative
landscapes.
14. Green Building Publications: Early 1990s
The Hannover Principles
◦ 1992, the city manager of Hannover, Germany, commissioned William McDonough to work with the city
to develop a set of principles for sustainable design for the 2000 Hannover World Fair.
◦ Insist on the rights of humanity and nature to coexist.
◦ Recognize interdependence.
◦ Respect relationships between spirit and matter.
◦ Accept responsibility for the consequences of design.
◦ Create safe objects of long-term value.
◦ Eliminate the concept of waste.
◦ Rely on natural energy flows.
◦ Understand the limitations of design.
◦ Seek constant improvement by the sharing of knowledge.
15. Green Building Publications: Early 1990s
The Local Government Sustainable Buildings Guidebook
◦ 1993, reveals some of the very first thoughts on the direction of the U.S. green building movement.
Page 98.
The Sustainable Building Technical Manual.
◦ 1996, provided a list of areas that should be considered in designing a green building. Page 98.
◦ Passive Solar Design
◦ Building Systems and IEQ
◦ Materials and Specifications
Environmental Building News
◦ Monthly journal dedicated to the subject of high-performance green building. Page 99.
16. Evolving concept of ecological design
General Management Rules for Sustainability
1. Use of renewable resources should not exceed the regeneration rate of any nonrenewable
resources inputs. This involves analyzing the total life cycle of products.
2. Nonrenewable resources should be used only if physical or functional substitutes are provided.
3. The release of waste matter should not exceed the absorption capacity of nature.
Design Principles for Industrial Ecology
1. Natural systems and human systems should interface with each other in a synergistic manner to the
benefit of both systems.
2. The behavior of large-scale societal systems should be as similar as possible to natural systems.
3. The function of a societal system should be carried out by a subsystem of the natural biosphere.
4. Nonrenewable resources are used only to bring renewable resources online.
17. Evolving concept of ecological design
General Management Rules for Sustainability
1. Use of renewable resources should not exceed the regeneration rate of any nonrenewable
resources inputs. This involves analyzing the total life cycle of products.
2. Nonrenewable resources should be used only if physical or functional substitutes are provided.
3. The release of waste matter should not exceed the absorption capacity of nature.
Design Principles for Industrial Ecology
1. Natural systems and human systems should interface with each other in a synergistic manner to the
benefit of both systems.
2. The behavior of large-scale societal systems should be as similar as possible to natural systems.
3. The function of a societal system should be carried out by a subsystem of the natural biosphere.
4. Nonrenewable resources are used only to bring renewable resources online.
18. Shift from Green to Regenerative Design
We are at the beginning of a shift in thinking
about the design of human systems that
ultimately needs to be restorative and
regenerative.
We are faced with the necessity of actually
having to revive nature after the damage done
by human intervention.
19. Shift from Green to Regenerative Design
The next step is Green Design.
Then Sustainable, or “Less Bad.”
Next lies Restorative Design – the first steps in
reviving or restoring nature.
Lastly – Regenerative Design – Humans
participating as nature.
20. Approaches
A “Limiting the Damage” Approach
◦ High-Performance Design: Design that realizes high efficiency and reduced impact in the building structure,
operations, and site activities. This term can imply a more technical efficiency approach to design and may
limit an embrace of the larger natural system benefits.
“Neutral” Approaches
◦ Green Design: A term implying a direction of improvement in design. Continual improvement towards a
generalized ideal of doing no harm.
◦ Sustainable Design: Green design with an emphasis on reaching a point of being able to sustain the health of
the planet’s organisms and systems over time.
“Restoration” Approaches
◦ Restorative Design: Using the activities of design and building to restore the capability of relativel
independent local natural systems to a healthy state of self-organization.
◦ Reconciliation Design: Design process that acknowledges that humans are an integral part of nature and that
human and natural systems are one.
21. Approaches
The “Regeneration” Approach
◦ Regenerative Design: Design process that engages and focuses on the evolution of the whole of the
system of which we are part. Our place – community, watershed, and bio-region – is the sphere in
which we can participate. By engaging all the key stakeholders and processes of the place – humans,
other biotic systems, earth systems, and the consciousness that connects them – the design process
builds the capability of people and the “more than human” participants to engage in continuous and
healthy relationship through coevolution. The design process draws from and supports continuous
learning through feedback, reflection, and dialogue so that all aspects of the system are integral parts of
the process of life in that place. Such processes tap into the consciousness of spirit of the people
engaged in a place, the only way to sustain sustainability.
23. Introduction
The green building movement is changing the nature of the built environment and the delivery
systems used to design and construct the building.
The result is the emergence of the high-performance green building delivery system.
◦ Selection of project team members based on their green building expertise.
◦ Increased collaboration among the project team members.
◦ More focus on building performance than on building systems.
◦ Environmental protection during the construction process.
◦ Occupant and worker health throughout all phases.
◦ Decision-making based on resource and life-cycle implications.
◦ Building commissioning.
◦ Reducing construction and demolition waste.
24. Conventional vs. Green Delivery Systems
Construction delivery systems in the U.S. fall into three major categories:
◦ Design-Bid-Build
◦ Construction Management-at-risk
◦ Design-Build
25. Design-Bid-Build
The primary objective of the design-bid-build, or hard bid, delivery system is low-cost delivery of
the completed project.
The design team is selected and hired by the owner.
Works on the owner’s behalf to produce construction documents that define the location,
appearance, materials, and methods to be used in the creation of the building and its
infrastructure.
General Contractors then bid on the project, with and lowest qualified bidder receiving the job.
Project is delivered at the lowest cost to the owner, however, conflicts among parties to the
contract (owner, designers, GC, subs, suppliers) are frequent.
Results in higher costs due to change orders, repairs, and lawsuits.
26. Construction Management at Risk
Owner contracts separately with the design team and contractor, or construction manager.
Both are selected at the start of the project.
Construction manager will work on the owner’s behalf.
Also known as negotiated work, because the construction manager negotiates a fee for management
services with the owner.
Construction manager is usually required to guarantee that total construction cost will not exceed a
maximum price, know as Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP).
Construction manager provides pre-construction services such as:
◦ Cost Analysis
◦ Constructability Analysis
◦ Value Engineering
◦ Project Scheduling
27. Construction Management at Risk
Working together, parties produce construction documents that meet the owner’s:
◦ Requirements
◦ Schedule
◦ Budget
And Prevent:
◦ Clash Detection
◦ Missing Information
Construction managers select sub-contractors based on their capabilities and not merely on the
lowest bid.
Level of conflict is lower because of the closer relationship among the parties to the contract.
28. Design-Build
Although negotiated work reduces the frequency and intensity of conflicts present in a hard bid,
the classic tension between the design team and construction manager still exist.
Design-Build is a method of project delivery in which one entity forges a single contract with the
owner to provide for architectural/engineering design services and construction services.
Provides the owner with a single contractual relationship with an entity that combines both
design and construction services.
This entity may be an in-house design and construction firm or a partnership between a design
firm and a construction firm.
29. Design-Build
Design-build is more likely:
◦ to reduce conflict between parties
◦ provide a lower price for the owner
◦ improve quality
◦ stay on schedule
◦ improve communication.
Compatible with the green building concept required to produce high-performance buildings.
30. Executing the Green Building Project
Requires greater communication among the project team members.
Initial team building, including all stakeholders, ensures that everyone understands the project’s
goals and the unique specifications.
Demands special qualifications from its participants, especially green building expertise.
Team members should have experience with the charette process and willing to engage a wide
range of stakeholders.
Example: the inclusion of community members in the charrette for the design of a corporate
facility.
31. Executing the Green Building Project
Due to its adversarial nature, the hard bid delivery system is exceptionally difficult to employ for
a green building project.
The design-build delivery system has significant potential to deliver green buildings, like
negotiated work, it is designed to minimize adversarial relationships and simplify transactions
among the parties.
Because of the transparency in design-build, the checks and balances between the design team
and the construction entity are practically non-existent.
Despite this potential problem, several successful green building projects have been executed
using design-build.
32. Executing the Green Building Project
Phases for executing a high-performance green building project:
◦ Setting priorities for the project by the owner in collaboration with the team.
◦ Selection of the project team: Design team and construction manager or the design-build firm.
◦ Implementing the Integrated Design Process (IDP): orienting the team to the concept of IDP and how it
will be implemented.
◦ Execution of the design process including schematic design, design development, construction
documents, and documentation of green building measures. This involves full implementation of IDP
starting in pre-design.
◦ Construction of the building addressing soil and erosion control, minimizing site disturbance, minimizing
and recycling construction waste, ensuring worker health, and green building documentation.
◦ Final commissioning and handover to the owner.
33. Executing the Green Building Project
Owner issues in high-performance green building projects:
◦ Does the owner want the building to be certified?
◦ What level of certification is desired? What are the cost/benefit issues? Provide a LCC analysis for each
level of certification.
◦ If the building is not to be certified, what criteria does the project team use? Design it to LEED Silver
standards without the certification?
◦ What are the qualifications of the project team with respect to high-performance building? Experience,
credentials, or both?
◦ What level of capital investment is the owner willing to provide in order to make the building high-
performance green?
◦ Is the owner willing to sacrifice higher up-front costs in return for lower operating costs? What is the
payback period? LCC analysis becomes crucial.
34. Executing the Green Building Project
What particular areas of sustainability, or categories, does the owner want to concentrate on?
◦ Water Conservation and Efficiency?
◦ Energy and Atmosphere?
Green buildings may implement strategies that require systems not found in conventional
buildings.
◦ Rainwater harvesting and greywater reuse require additional piping, pumps, and cisterns.
◦ As a result, the owner may decide to use simple, cost-effective measures.
Organizations may have a revolving fund that will allow the life-cycle savings to pay for the
upfront installation.
There will most likely be additional upfront costs compared to conventional buildings.
However, an effective LCC can provide the owner with justification for pursuing high-
performance green building and/or certification.
35. Hiring the Design Team
Once the owner has decided to pursue a high-performance green building, the next step is to select the design
and construction teams.
The selection process can be done by issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP), or Request for Qualifications (RFQ) by
the owner to announce the upcoming selection of the architect and CM.
The RFP/RFQ should specify additional qualifications required of the architect, and the architect’s consultants.
◦ LEED APs?
◦ Experience?
◦ Understanding of High-Performance Green Buildings?
After reviewing submissions, the final selection is based on experience, qualifications, previous work,
understanding of the owner’s program and requirements, and of course budget.
The construction manager or design-build firm should be selected prior to the start of the design so that both will
be on board for the entire project.
Both the design and construction team must have knowledge and experience with high-performance green
buildings and/or green building certifications.
36. Hiring the Design Team
LEED AP – LEED Accredited Professional.
◦ This designation provides the building owner with a high degree of assurance that the requirements of the
USGBC and GBCI certification programs will be understood and the required documentation will be provided.
◦ Must have LEED-registered project experience within the past 2 years.
◦ Must pass the LEED AP exam, now with specialization.
LEED GA – LEED Green Associate
◦ The first step in becoming a LEED AP.
◦ Must pass the LEED GA exam.
Benefits of having a LEED AP on the team:
◦ Earn an additional Innovation in Design credit or point.
◦ LEED AP should have knowledge, experience, and leadership capabilities needed for project success.
LEED projects do not currently require a LEED AP or LEED GA on the team.
37. Integrated Design Process
It is true that excellent teamwork is required for the success of any building project.
However, the level of interaction and communication needed for a green building project is
significantly higher.
It is necessary to orient all members of the project team to the goals and objectives of the
project. Why?
◦ It can inform the project team about all project requirements.
◦ If can familiarize the project team with the owner’s priorities.
◦ It can provide an opportunity for team building.
Integrated Design Process (IDP) – process in which multiple disciplines and seemingly unrelated
aspects of design are integrated in a manner that permits synergistic benefits to be realized. The
goal is to achieve high performance and multiple benefits at a lower cost than the total for all the
components combined.
38. Integrated Design Process
Characterized by early
significant collaboration in
the design process.
In conventional design, the
team begins their joint effort
at the start of schematic
design.
IDP begins in pre-design.
The earlier integrated design
is implemented, the greater
the benefits.
39. Integrated Design Process
IDP is a method for realizing high performance buildings that contribute to sustainable
communities. It is a collaborative process that focuses on the design, construction, operation,
and occupancy of a building over its complete life-cycle. The IDP is designed to allow the client
and stakeholders to develop and realize clearly defined and challenging functional,
environmental and economic goals and objectives. The IDP requires a multi-disciplinary design
team that includes or acquires the skills required to address all design issues flowing from the
objectives. The IDP proceeds from whole building system strategies, working through increasing
levels of specificity, to realize more optimally integrated solutions.
40. Integrated Design Process
Potential areas for Integrated Design in
building projects:
◦ Building Envelope
◦ Daylighting Design
◦ Green Roofs
◦ Minimization of Light Pollution
◦ Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)
◦ Building Hydrologic Cycle
◦ Many more…
INTERIOR
DESIGNER
41. Integrated Design Process
The main elements of the IDP are defined as:
◦ Interdisciplinary work between architects, engineers, costing specialists, operations people and other relevant actors right
from the beginning of the design process.
◦ Discussion of the relative importance of various performance issues and the establishment of a consensus on this matter
between client and designers.
◦ The addition of an energy specialist, to test out various design assumptions through the use of energy simulations
throughout the process, to provide relatively objective information on a key aspect of performance.
◦ The addition of subject specialists (daylighting, thermal storage, etc.) for short consultations with the design team.
◦ A clear articulation of performance targets and strategies, to be updated throughout the process by the design team.
◦ In some cases, a Design Facilitator may be added to the team, to raise performance issues throughout the process and to
bring specialized knowledge to the table.
42. Integrated Design Process
Traditional design could be said to have three steps:
◦ The client and architect agree to a design concept that includes the general massing of the building, its orientation, its fenestration,
and probably its general appearance and basic materials.
◦ The mechanical and electrical engineers are engaged to design systems based on the building design concept agreed to in Step 1. The
civil engineer and landscape architect develop a concept for landscaping, parking, paving, and infrastructure based on the building
design concept and the owner’s wishes.
◦ Each phase of design (schematic, design development, and construction documents) is carried out employing the same pattern, with
minimal interaction between disciplines, little or no interdisciplinary collaboration, and attention to the speed and efficiency of
executing each discipline’s design.
The result is a linear, noncollaborative process in which no goals are set and the performance of the building is purely
random.
Each discipline functions in isolation with interdisciplinary communication kept at a minimum.
The result is not only an unoptimized project, but also a range of other potential problems caused by a lack of strong
coordination among disciplines.
43. Integrated Design Process
In contrast to traditional design, the point of IDP is to optimize the entire building project, and requirements for
communication are intense, nonstop, and occur at all stages of the project.
Typical sequence of events indicative to IDP:
◦ Project team establishes performance targets.
◦ Project team develops preliminary strategies to achieve these targets.
◦ Analysis and evaluation of strategies should start to prevent commitment to a suboptimal design solution.
◦ Minimize heating and cooling loads and maximize daylighting potential through orientation, building configuration, efficient
envelope, and fenestration placement, size, and frequency.
◦ Reduce energy consumption and address IEQ.
◦ Maximize the use of renewable energy while using energy efficient systems.
The earlier IDP is instituted, the greater its effect on the design process.
Maximum benefit occurs when employing IDP before the start of design.
Another name for IDP is Whole Building Design.
46. The Charrette
The National Charrette Institute (NCI) states there are four guiding principles for a charrette:
◦ Involve everyone from the start. Identification and solicitation of stakeholders to provide input is of the
utmost importance because everyone will share a sense of ownership for the outcome. The broader the
range of input, the more likely the project is to be successful and accepted by the community.
◦ Work concurrently and cross-functionally. All disciplines should work together at the same time during the
charrette under the guidance of a facilitator. A building design charrette produces a wide range of potential
solutions and approaches that not only cover green issues, but also address the function of the building and
its relationship to the community.
◦ Work in short feedback loops. Proposed solutions and measures are laid out in a brainstorming session
during which the participants cover all aspects of the building, its infrastructure, and its relationship to the
community. This approach produces far more alternatives and engages far more creativity than a
conventional design process.
◦ Work in detail. The more detail in a charrette the better. Alternatives for building appearance, orientation,
massing, and electrical and mechanical systems should be sketched out in as much detail as possible. Large-
scale and small-scale details should be approached and discussed.
47. The Charrette
The National Charrette Institute (NCI) has developed a four-step process for conducting a charrette:
◦ Startup. Determine who the stakeholders are, engage the stakeholders in the process, establish goals,
determine the time and place for holding the charrette, and notify participants of the details.
◦ Research, education, and concepts. Prior to the charrette, the owner, facilitator, and design team members
should discuss the needs for the charrette. The owner’s directions, the building program, site details, utility
information, and other pertinent data should be gathered and ready for the charrette.
◦ The charrette. Should be conducted by a facilitator familiar with the green building process. The charrette
might occur over several days and continue in phases until complete. Educate all participants on the owner’s
requirements. Review the building program, previous schemes, orientation, budget, and schedule. Lay out
the goals of the project with respect to its green high-performance aspects. Determine level of green building
certification. Conduct brainstorming sessions that draws out input from the group about every aspect of the
project. Keep a running scorecard on building assessment. What are the economics of each decision?
Construction manager must be able to rapidly assess costs.
◦ Review, revise, and finalize. After the charrette is complete, the design team reviews the results with the
owner, makes any adjustments, then produces a report of the charrette to guide the design process.
48. The Charrette
The charrette typically launches the design phase of the project.
Steps in a typical charrette can be summarized as follows:
◦ Provide the stakeholders and participants with an overview of the owner’s goals, the building program,
the budget, and project schedule.
◦ Discuss the LEED or other certification goals.
◦ Conduct an open brainstorming session generating as many ideas as possible.
◦ Organize the results into major categories.
◦ Site
◦ Water
◦ Energy
◦ Materials
◦ IEQ
49. The Charrette
◦ Have the participants select their top measures.
◦ Sort the measures by order of interest.
◦ List the top measures by order of interest and begin to develop strategies to achieve them.
◦ Compare results to the LEED rating system to determine how many credits are achievable.
◦ Determine the cost of the entire project.
◦ Determine whether building performance and budget has been met.
◦ If performance and/or budget have not been met, additional brainstorming may be needed.
