Tina Tang |
Monday, 8 December 2008 1:00 AM |
Now that ESD and in fact the even newer acronym ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) is all important, what does that mean for aesthetics?
Is it possible to have inspired and inspiring buildings that look excellent and which are also great examples of sustainable design? Certainly we would like to think that with advances in spatial planning software, technology and even manufacturers catching on, it should be relatively easy.
Generally any conversation or debate that covers the greening of the built environment is often in terms of what boxes are ticked rather than how the spaces uplift or sustain the soul.
Even when houses are displayed in newspapers, green points are presented in a checklist. Cross ventilation? Tick. Thermal mass? Tick. Rainwater tank? Tick.
A house’s appearance though is described with loving words: beautiful materials, flowing spaces, warm cabinetry, luscious colours, elegant furnishings. Similarly, commercial buildings have the tag line promoting the number of Green Stars and efficiency without too much emphasis on the workspace itself.
Would the Opera House or many other great iconic buildings of the world have been built if sustainability was the main criteria for the design competition? Could it have been built sustainably? Surely with the increased knowledge and skills in our industry we can now have both.
It’s about time the property industry cast off its ‘tick the box’ approach to sustainability. Focusing on measurement of everything takes the whimsy and imagination out of the development process. To create something special you need to do more than just jump over the hurdles.
If we change the way we talk about sustainability, we might be better able to achieve beautiful design hand-in-hand with environmental, social and economic outcomes. Social sustainability is as important as environmental.
What we, the property industry, leave as a legacy can facilitate social capital or can be a barrier to it. Beautiful cities are socially sustainable and the best of them were never built with responding to the threat of climate change in mind.
They were however, planned for utilising and responding to the local climate and supported the wellbeing and connectivity of their residents and visitors.
I don’t mean to say sustainability is for tree-huggers or social activists, merely to seek to make sustainability more integral to the pleasure we take in great design.
I’m suggesting that we should take the opportunity to integrate environmental and social needs into the development process and lifecycle of a building generally, and surely we can save the world and have a good time doing it.
Tina Tang is general manager of commercial developments at Investa Property Group.
Tina Tang |
Monday, 8 December 2008 1:00 AM |
