Small Firms Ideas Exchange

I’ve noticed that during this recent “financial crisis” as the news stations all report, I’ve succumbed to a different slant on how I make decisions. How do I determine which projects to go after, how do I determine the reliability/stability of potential clients and, after occupancy, what “Leave Behind” is appropriate?

Essentially, the design work is the same although we are modifying some initial design discussions based on what is currently cheap or available in the market (I say cheap, but inexpensive is a more appropriate term). Project management seems to be affected marginally; typically we include a set number of CCA meeting. These days we stick to that number rather than make multiple trips; I guess that’s driven by the bottom line.

Has anyone else modified what you do? Why you do it? Or how you think about it?  I know that I’m getting really tired of listening to the am radio and hearing “… and now for an update on America’s Financial Crisis…”  Really, if what we’ve stepped into is stuck to our shoe, it’s no longer a crisis but a reality and I think it needs a different thought pattern to clean it up.

Blah Bla Bla… we hear this all the time from our clients, excuses from the permitting offices, etc. It gets old. I have a way, I think, I’ve actually been doing more with less: Internet networking and using online resources such as FaceBook, LinkedIn, and Twitter.

I’ve joined FaceBook primarily to keep in contact with family and friends.  I joined LinkedIn as my colleagues invited me. I joined Twitter at the request of the AIA to use during the upcoming AIA convention in San Francisco.

So far, I’ve found more business opportunities using FaceBook (after all, we like our friends; let’s work together and have more fun!). LinkedIn has actually expanded my resources when trying to “find answers” to some issues I’m searching.

Twitter – hmmm, the jury’s still out on that one.  I’ll play but don’t know what good it will actually do. I’ll report back after the convention. Look for me on Twitter. Apparently you need to “follow” someone to receive their postings.  I’m MustangDory or www.Twitter.com/MustangDory

To avoid the “technology searching for a solution” pitfall, I’ve limited my time on any/all of these media to 15 minutes in the morning (yes, I’ve been tracking it on my time sheet).  I have logged into LinkedIn when I have a specific question/discussion to start with one of the groups (i.e., LEED 2009 questions).

So far it’s working.  How about you?

—Lisa Stacholy, AIA

A little background:  Ok, so I’m a recently accredited LEED professional (yes, prior to March 31, 2009– big whoop). Some colleagues/teammates whom I work with asked me to help out with “that LEED stuff for a proposal.” Oh joy! 

First, I need to rant a bit. I found studying for the LEED exam extremely tedious; with no real “resolution” or “outcome” other than passing the test. I admit frustration with how the LEED study guides were written. It’s not really how I’ve practiced architecture for the last 14 years. Realistically I think that all good architects think inherently in the whole building approach. We know the “gives and takes” of building orientation, mechanical system trade-offs. The LEED exam was more about recalling facts by rote but felt a little isolated and not cohesive; maybe that’s a side effect of the nature of computerized testing. (Yes, I’m a product of Old School. I took the architecture exam over a 3-day period when it was all by pencil; it felt a little more “real,” like the practice of architecture, but I digress).

So, trying to explain the “what” of the MR credits to my colleague was the “easy” part… not having a clear answer to the “why” he asked, “but why are the percentages set at these levels; they seem arbitrary." My only response was “Perhaps they are, but USGBC is relying on project data since 1998 and these criteria apparently work best towards attaining the goal of sustainable construction."

Back to the main topic:  So I was an owner's rep. on a project which started out with the Board’s lofty goals of “constructing a LEED certified classroom building.” So I said, “Excuse me guys, I think you’ll find that you’ll get more bang for the buck if we use LEED concepts and sustainable products/techniques and forego the project registration”; that was in 2003.  Fast forward to 2007 when the Board hired an architect and a LEED consultant for the project and, surprise, preliminary budget numbers showed a $65,000-$85,000 premium to construct 17,000 SF of classroom building and attain LEED certification. Ultimately the Board elected to build sustainable, save the cost of enhanced commissioning, energy modeling, etc. and install ground source heat pumps as a part of the HVAC system. The final GMP cost showed the cost “savings” of not LEED certifying the project more than covered the cost of the geothermal system and related specialty HVAC equipment. If I hadn’t been so involved, I never would have believed it.

If the choice is a) building what the owner wants, b) building within the owner’s budget c) advising the owner what’s the best way to get from point A to point B (so far I’d suggest don’t be blinded by a plaque on the wall), continue to use your architect’s best judgment and design with all the tools you have available (LEED is another tool, not the end-all to end all).  In addition to the good design, there are tons of great “tag line,” “one-liners,” and lessons that are easily accessible for discussion among the school kids, the parents, and professionals like us.

http://www.wsbtv.com/video/16161467/index.html

—Lisa Stacholy, AIA

This is Part Two of last week's blog:  http://blog.aia.org/smallfirms/2009/04/leed_vs_sustainable.html

While visiting the school where I’m on the Board (yes, my kids go to that school so I’m there a lot), I had a discussion with the business manager. He told me the local power company  asked if they could come to the campus and do an “audit” of the energy consumption at the new 17,000 SF buildings.  The power company reps came out, walked the campus, looked at the buildings, looked at the MDP in the original main building, looked at the electrical and mechanical rooms in the new buildings, made a few notes, and left.

Hmmm… The next week (as I understand the story) the business manager got back in contact with the power company to get a read on their findings. Here’s where the story gets good. Apparently, the power consumption for the entire campus has gone down since the 17,000 SF buildings began occupancy in September 2008.  Mind you, the new buildings (all 17,000 SF of them) replaced 4 modular units (YeeHaa -3 double wides, 1 triple wide, totaling 7,240 SF).  The campus has a net gain of 9,760 square feet and the power consumption has gone down by some 35-40% (at least that’s with 7 months history… we’ll see what the Georgia summer does).

Analysis:  White TPO roof, R25+/- roof insulation, icynene insulation at 6” metal stud exterior walls, fritt and insulated glazing in thermal break storefront windows as punched openings, CIP foundation walls (lower level of building half recessed into hillside), ground-source heat pumps providing 40 tons of cooling to FCUs with ionic/UV air scrubbers on return air. It's pretty awesome that the building is performing this well. We’ll see what the summer does but we all have high hopes.

Would I make the same recommendation again? Absolutely! For this private school, it would have been nice to have bragging rights to LEED certification but it is my hope that, based on the excellent building performance, the schedule for subsequent buildings on the master plan can be accelerated, based on the realized operational cost savings now.

—Lisa Stacholy, AIA