Updated Feb 2017
NZACS supports the environmentally sustainable design (ESD) initiatives taken by many members of the profession and by the NZIA.The Leaky Buildings saga changed building technology and the benchmarks of reasonable skill and care. Looking to the future, we should be alert to potential liabilities arising from failing to observe ESD principles.
Many practices are promoting themselves as “green”. In doing so, they must take care to not to misrepresent what can actually be achieved. This project, or this client, may not be a suitable candidate, and - even assuming that the architect has the necessary competencies - other project priorities may rank ahead of expenditure on ESD. The resulting outcomes may deliver less than the expectations of the immediate client and future building users.When viewed in retrospect, the changed priorities and the limitations placed on ESD may not be obvious, and that opens the way for present and future stakeholders to assert that the design has failed to meet reasonable performance requirements. Promised ESD outcomes must be realistic, and changes in ESD design issues should be recorded to minimise potential liability.
There is an increasing awareness of toxicity issues, and the aging demographic may change the way buildings relate to the health and welfare needs of their users. Some presently known issues are:
Who knows what the design standards of the future may be?There are numerous examples of houses which were designed in accordance with accepted norms but which were later spurned as “leaky buildings”. The perception is almost as important as the reality, with consequent loss in value of those buildings whether they leak or not. Increasingly ESD will become the expected norm, and buildings falling short of whatever benchmarks prevail in the future will be seen as of lesser value.It is natural that present standards are used to value building stock created in the past, and there is a potential for a claim of negligence to be based on a failure of a building to meet future (unknown) standards. That may be irrational, but it still means that architects should be alert to the need to assert ESD initiatives and to record the outcomes of their efforts.
The wastage of energy, pollution of the environment, and the specifying of non-renewable resources, are assuming increasing importance. Architects have an ethical duty – beyond their professional responsibility to the client - to act in the good interests of the community and society in general.There will come a time when a client, a building user, or a community may assert that in failing to adequately address ESD issues, or toxicity and health issues, an architect has failed to act in their best interests. This is a potential liability that should be considered in every project.The sustainability of our environment and the continuing good health of our people are not matters that we should allow ourselves to be diverted from as a result of pressures that our clients or others might bring to bear.If these pressures are because of lack of awareness or ignorance, we should expend the effort to inform. If they are because of economic considerations, we should expound arguments that transcend economics and paint a broader picture.