|
|
|
|
Last week, Robert Ivy, in "AIArchitect" asked members to identify issues for AIA's positions leading to the Accreditation Review Conference (ARC) to be held in 2013. The NAAB holds the ARC every five years. The last ARC was in 2008. Representatives from AIA, NCARB, ACSA, AIAS and NAAB assemble and deliberate to determine the changes to be adopted in the 2014 Conditions for Accreditation, including the Student Performance Criteria. Following the ARC, members of the NAAB write the new Conditions, which are then sent out for public comment, and then modified and adopted. They are then in effect for 5 years. Now is the time to let AIA know of your concerns as they begin preparing their positions ahead of the ARC. ------------------------------------------- Michael Broshar FAIA Principal INVISION Planning Architecture Interiors Waterloo IA -------------------------------------------
Show Original Message
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-01-2012 08:53
From: Peter Papesch
Subject: Green washed
-------------------------------------------
Peter Papesch AIA
Chair, BSA Sustainability Education Committee
Former (and founding) chair of USGBC-MA Education Committee
Boston MA
papesch@mac.com
-------------------------------------------
First of all, please forgive this double-posting, but I didn't realize that it is preferable to Reply to the Discussion Forum than to Post Message ... ;-(
John Corkill pretty much says it all: the AIA missed the opportunity to establish performance criteria, GBC picked up the challenge, and now GBC has become an institution that needs to find ways to continue its economic success - a success that is and was built on the obvious need of society to have metrics for evaluating architects', engineers' and contractors' claims of the performance of their designs (i.e. pre-implementation guesses).
Leaving aside the debate about LEED accreditation by individuals or firms as a credibility metric for the public, nothing prevents all firms interested in climate change mitigation rather than aggravation to use LEED or Living Building Challenge as checklists to incorporate and coordinate the best combination of energy-frugal strategies in their designs. Note the emphasis on strategies rather than specific task items.
Now here comes the problem, which we've been trying to address since 2009: few graduating professionals in the building sector (architects, engineers, contractors) have learned the tools, skills and methods - and in particular the interdisciplinary collaboration - that a carbon neutral project requires. For that reason we have been attempting to convince the National Architectural Accreditation Board (NAAB) and its collateral organizations (AIA, AIAS, ACSA and NCARB) to inspire each architecture school to muster its internal resources -- faculty, administration, students and trustees -- to develop curricular objectives that all graduates -- of any school -- be proficient in designing projects which mitigate climate change while being practical, inspiring and accountable to users and to society.
If you agree with this idea, please consider signing our petition <http://www.change.org/petitions/require-of-graduating-architects-full-competence-to-design-energy-neutral-buildings>. In addition, a couple of us have been working on pulling together what we call "A Working Inventory for the 21st Century Architect of Design Principles & Parameters, Design Tools, and Design Coordination that comprise the 'Architecture' of Climate Change mitigation". Want to get involved?
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-28-2012 10:34
From: John Corkill
Subject: Green washed
-------------------------------------------
John Corkill AIA
Corkill Cush Reeves Architects
Bowie MD
-------------------------------------------
When I was on the National Board and was head of the then-ExComm of the then-PIA's back in the pliestocene era, we blew it on the environment. I hang my head in shame that none of us at the national nor the COTE level set up a system like LEED. While surely many AIA'ers and likely COTE members were involved in the Green Building Council, nevertheless, the main impetus should have come from AIA, where perhaps some of the excesses of the GBC could have been avoided.
First, however, the GBC has accomplished one wonderful thing : Those folks have given architecture some validity back.
Prior to LEED, architecture's Vitruvian motto, "Firmness, Commodity, and Delight" had devolved to "DELIGHT"
and that only. The mags, the schools, our chapter awards programs, all focused on the well-photographed, beautiful artifact - no matter how much energy, or practicality, or livibility was squandered in the headlong worship of beauty, uber alles.
Those who suffered in beautiful but illogical and energy-squandering buildings found it hard to rejoice in the AIA Design Award hanging in the lobby while freezing or sweltering, or facing ruinous energy bills. Our clients might have been forgiven for wondering where the "Firmness" and "Commodity" went.
However, having won that great moral victory for our profession, GBC has lapsed into the eternal human problem of deeply needing to follow yesterday's victories by even new and greater victories today and tomorrow. Thus, the exams get harder and more restrictive, and building codes and local officials are lobbied to fix in stone the LEED system as supreme. The expenditure of effort and scarce resources out of proportion to the increased savings of energy in the new, improved, tightened regulations starts to eat up the savings while bringing down on all of our heads the inevitable backlash from the industry and the community alike.
There seems to be in the newer tightened LEED demands an increasing reliance on electronic gadgetry to control every aspect of a building's performance, regardless of the scale of the structure, or the staffing available to maintain the place. Embarrassments such as early LEED buildings that do not perform as predicted, LEED (sorry) to demands that "Commissioners" be hired- at fees similar to architect's original design fees - to put the building through its predicted paces. When these unregistered "Commissioners" find what seem to them to be design errors during their commissioning, they have a convenient scapegoat, the original architect, whose liability insurance will surely pay for any corrections or improvements.
Then, the owner takes over the building and fails to tune up the computer controls, or lets tenants leave windows open in the winter/summer. Inevitably, that building will burn more energy than was predicted, and if the hapless architect has guaranteed a certain cost level for future energy bills as part of her LEEDs or her marketing to get the job, she might as well bring her liability insurer in early to prepare for the inevitable lawsuit.
Other than those few quibbles, LEED is great.
John F. Corkill, Jr., AIA
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-27-2012 14:55
From: Thomas Streicher
Subject: Green washed
I have always been environmentally minded, even when "tree hugger" was almost a derogatory moniker (I have also always been suspicious of non-profits that seem to charge a lot of fees for stuff, but that's not really relevant here). Anyway, I have not yet gotten myself leed accredited, but it appears the time to do so may be near. But now it seems there are more "green certification" originations gaining traction like NAHB green globe and others, and I was wondering: do you all think we need to join up with all of them or wait it out and see who comes out on top and go with that? Just wondering. I would hate to invest lots of time and cash on one just to have it be eclipsed by another and have to almost start over. (Sort of like AutoCAD architecture to Revit, but that's another rant) Incidentally, I still think the $25K to $150K I have seen spent on getting a building green certified by whatever green.org would be, in most cases be better spent on the building itself which would be even better for the environment. This post is intended to stir discussion and not intended to make anyone upset or mad. -------------------------------------------
Thomas Streicher AIA
Thomas Streicher, Architect
Monroe NY
-------------------------------------------
|
|
Be the first person to recommend this.
|