Colorado Sustainable Design Awards: Beyond the call of green

Page 2

Commercial and Civic: These broad categories cover a variety of building types. In deciding the winners, we gravitated toward those that used the vocabulary of performance and metrics in describing their projects.

We found it difficult to credit a project with an award if it didn’t reference its percent reduction in energy use relative to the baseline established by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers ; or quote its projected or actual energy performance in kBtu/SF (a thousand British thermal units per square foot); or report its water reductions in gallons or percent reduction from a baseline.

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards have made the use of performance metrics a basic expectation in green building projects, and whether or not projects pursued actual LEED certification, we expected to see the self-same performance metrics that LEED would require – percent recycled content, construction waste diverted, open space created, stormwater treated, etc. – rather than a whimsical listing of cool toys and technology.

Further, we were impressed when a project described how it was translating the design intents into ongoing performance (e.g. generating Energy Star scores, conducting ongoing commissioning, etc.).

We also found ourselves gravitating toward what we considered “intelligent architecture” – buildings that are designed in the context of their natural settings to capture or reject the sun, wind and water. The winners typically described building orientation as a primary consideration and articulated a massing and shading and scheme that varied based on aspect. Thoughtful buildings should look different from the south, the west, the north, the east, and the winners successfully reflect this thinking.

Lastly, we looked for buildings that spoke substantively to the different aspects of a green building rather than focusing simply on energy. An academic building or a hospital, for example, that embraces daylight, ventilation, durability and the creation of learning spaces or patient care while addressing energy and water efficiency is an impressive feat. We were also attracted to projects that would serve as models for future building in their particular industry.

Communities: The economy and the market for new master plan developments in the past year made this an especially challenging category. The winners included two projects that are either built or appear to be moving forward.

The winners were either mountain town extensions (non-greenfield) or an example of suburban net-zero-living (that has garnered international attention). One aspect that was missing from the entries in this group was the dense, urban, mixed-use, infill projects that in our minds define the Communities category. Many of the master-planned projects that might achieve this have either been scuttled or indefinitely put on hold.

But it seems that in the future, this sort of development – in places like Denver, Boulder and Colorado Springs – that combines walkable spaces, green open space and the softening of the urban landscape, while revitalizing an urban setting with density and commerce, is one of the necessary elements of sustainability for the state going forward.

-By Joshua Radoff on behalf of the judges:

- Richard Farley, principal, Civitas, Denver
- Mark Gelernter, dean of the College of Architecture and Planning, University of Colorado, Denver
- Conor Merrigan, principal, C2 Green Development Services, Denver
- Susan Powers, president, Urban Ventures LLC, Denver
- Joshua Radoff, principal, YRG Sustainability, Boulder

See all the winners and their designs

Mike Cote is the editor of ColoradoBiz. E-mail him at .

• Page 1
• Page 2

• Email
• Share
 

Enjoy this video? Share it with others.