Seattle Community Centers Put Sustainability to the Test [Public Works]

Seattie Community Centers Put S u s t a i n a h i l i t y t o t h e T e s t DOIIIIId Canty A set or c o m m u n i t y centers i n Seattle is p r o v i d i n g ' a k i n d o l L i h o r . i t o n exper- i n i e n t i n the search for sustainabilhy. T h e five centers, t w o c o m p l e t e d and three under wav, were designed u n d e r sustainable p u b l i c b u i l d i n g guidelines lor the t w e n t y first c e n t u r y drafted especially for t h e m . T h e experiment was instigated b\ Seattle architect and e n v i r o n m e n t a l consultant C h r i s Still ford, w h o has served for 13 years o n various e n v i r o n - m e n t a l committees of the \ n i e r i i an I n s t i t u t e of \ r c h i t e c t s at the national level. T h e s e c o m m i t t e e s have become incieasingly aggressiy e and i n f l u e n t i a l , t h e i r efforts c u l m i n a t i n g in the 1993 W o r l d Congress of A r c h i t e c t s , w h i c h had e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n c e r n as its t h e m e and issued the declaration: all mint participate in the avi/litw of nv ecologically sustainable future ... but the integrating professions — architects and Stafford got f u n d i n g f r o m the Bonneville Power \ d m i n i s t r a t i o n and Seattle City L i g h t , the local electric utility, and in June 1902 c o m e n e d a w o r k s h o p of local and national architec- tural environmentalists. T h e result was a 62-page d o c u m e n t entitled D e s i g n - ing \ x i i l l V i s i o n that x\as g h e n to each of the c o m m u n i t y ' center architects. C o n v e n t i o n a l p l a n n i n g and design, the d o c u m e n t notes, often creates a steel, concrete and plastic energy and resource h o g . I t calls for n o t h i n g less than a new way of t h i n k i n g about b u i l d i n g design and use that makes sus- t a i n a b i l i t v central. I t is peppered w i t h aphorisms and exhortations: Reduce, reuse, recycle, r e t h i n k and p r o b l e m s are o p p o r t u n i t i e s , wastes are resources. ( j e t t i n g doyvn to specifics, the d o c - u m e n t establishes p e r f o r m a n c e targets in such areas as oyerall energy efficien- ()b/ec/ives for the site: Provide tcanuce landscaping and site low-main- improvements. land- Include unlive, edible, food-producing scaping. I'ro/cct natural site features. Objectives for structure: space fund ions with site-solar (.'oordinate orientation. Define the building envelope using super insulated roof and walls, high performance glazinn and skylights, thermal mass and airlock cnliy. ' l b achieve the energy saving target, the checklist suggests c o n s i d e r i n g solar and g e o l h e r m a l energy sources, cogen- eration and use of m o r e efficient: 1! V A C s y stems and l i g h t i n g hardw are. It calls for use o f h a l f recycled and half recyclable b u i l d i n g materials and avoidance o f o l d - g r o w t h hardwoods and c h l o r o - f l u o r o c a r b o n products. T h e five centers were designed t o a c o m m o n p r o b l e m adjusted t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l sites. A l l w i l l be r o u g h l y 19.000 square feet a n d c o n t a i n a lobbv, m u l t i p u r p o s e and a c t i v i t y r o o m s , a k i t c h e n , a large g y m n a s i u m and space for a f a m i l y c o u n s e l i n g and educational center. In the p r o g r a m , t h e parks and rec- reation d e p a r t m e n t r e c o m m e n d s the guidelines t o the architects b u t offers its o w n s i x - p o i n t list of e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , w h i c h emphasizes day- l i g h t i n g , passive h e a t i n g and natural v e n t i l a t i o n . G i v e n a choice between this list o r 62 pages of guidelines, i t is not hard t o guess w h i c h got m o r e o f cy, i n c l u d i n g e m b o d i e d energy c o n s i d - erations; conservation o f water and electricity; and e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y sensi- tive use of materials. Some of the tar- gets are n u m e r i c a l , represented as a percentage o f local o r federal energy codes. In the case of energy efficiency, for example, the d o c u m e n t calls l o r b e a t i n g the codes by 65 percent. F u l l o v i i n g the targets, the d o c u - ment presents ->() pages o f strategic advice subsequently s u m m a r i z e d i n a checklist. A s a m p l i n g o f the r e c o m - mendations in the checklist: engineers, planners and designers — are partieularh' critical because we are respon- sible for the impact of what we construct. Staiford saw the o p p o r t u n i t y t o apply such e x h o r t a t i o n s locally i n the c o m m u n i t y center p r o g r a m . J )e approached the city's department o f parks anil recreation, w h i c h is a d m i n i s - t e r i n g the p r o g r a m , about inserting considerations of sustainabilhy i n t o the centers* p r o g r a m m i n g and design. The d i r e c t o r agreed to do so i l Stafford c o u l d p r o y i d e specific guidelines. P L A C E S