Landcare Research Building, Tamaki

The Landcare Research Building in Tamaki is a sustainable development designed by Chow-Hill architects and Connell Mott MacDonald. Visioning and sustainability workshops were held with a large range of internal and external stakeholders to frame the sustainability objectives and to identify any barriers to the project. A Natural Step Workshop was also held to reinforce the importance of sustainability in the design. The design was then developed with the needs of those using the building in mind, and synergy was identified between these, the environment and economics. The building is both energy and water efficient. The mechanical and electrical systems have been integrated so they function off each other where possible. A contractor was brought into the team at an early stage of the design.

The construction costs were estimated to be the same as if the building was designed using a conventional approach. The building is expected to save approximately $70,000 a year in energy bills, which is a 60 to 70 percent reduction in energy consumption (Landcare Research, 2008).

The building achieves a 60 percent rating under the National Australian Built Environment Rating System NABERS (Landcare Research, 2008). This government environmental performance tool rates the energy and water use within a building. Research into improving the environmental sustainability of this building is ongoing.

Maths, Statistics and Computer Science Building, University of Canterbury

The Maths, Statistics and Computer Sciences Building at the University of Canterbury was designed to include passive heating, cooling and ventilation features to help it achieve the required energy target that was set at the beginning of the project. Thermal and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling was used to assess the comfort levels of spaces in the building. Integrated features of the building perform multiple functions where possible to minimise materials use and recognise the interconnectedness of some of the design principles.

Stakeholders were involved in identifying the design objectives and reviewing the developing design. Innovative design concepts were used in parallel with traditional methods to achieve optimum solutions. A building user manual was created to inform occupants of the heating and ventilation systems installed in the building. Ongoing evaluation was used to assess the building’s performance. A post-occupancy evaluation was carried out by Victoria University of Wellington which showed the building came within the top five percentile of buildings tested by the building use studies (BUS) method, indicating a high level of satisfaction.

The cost of the project was calculated at $2,000/m2 which is 15 percent below the estimated conventional building cost of $2,300/m2 (Ministry for the Environment, 2007). An energy audit showed the annual energy consumption to be 140kWh/m2 which is below the standard annual energy consumption of 185kWh/m2 for a building of this size (Ministry for the Environment, 2007).

Conservation House, Department of Conservation, Wellington

The design brief for Conservation House was for a high-performance building that included energy efficient and environmentally sustainable strategies. Active chilled beams, natural ventilation, a high-performance double skin facade and high-performance lighting provide energy-efficient solutions within the building. The Department of Conservation staff were surveyed and their needs were included in the design brief. The Australian Green Star rating tool was used as a guide for sustainability in the design.

Inland Revenue Greater Wellington Property Project

When the Inland Revenue was seeking new leased accommodation from building owners in Wellington, it used an innovative and collaborative procurement process. This included developing a non-prescriptive accommodation brief with a series of defining objectives and performance indicators. The brief was subject to extensive consultation with Inland Revenue stakeholders. Post-occupancy evaluation and building condition surveys were also undertaken on existing Inland Revenue facilities to further inform the process.

A collaborative design approach was then used with a number of shortlisted building owners by using their expertise and that of Inland Revenue’s project teams to maximise the opportunity of creating an innovative solution. The purpose of the approach was to ensure that the specific needs of Inland Revenue were incorporated into the preliminary designs for their accommodation solution.

The selection process began with an initial registration of interest followed by a stage one request for proposals to obtain a shortlist of prospective building owners who demonstrated that they were able to work in a collaborative manner and had the potential to deliver an accommodation solution that fully met the needs of Inland Revenue.

The stage two request for proposals was a 10-week process which included pre-scheduled meetings for building owner and Inland Revenue project teams to discuss building design, commercial terms and building operation to provide an environment that supported Inland Revenue’s business. The workshop meetings required building owners’ teams to present the various elements of their proposals and to submit questions which were answered by the Inland Revenue project team. Inland Revenue’s project team provided guidance and feedback to building owners and their project teams.

Selection of the preferred building owner was on the basis of final written submissions and presentations and a weighted attributes analysis which included a sophisticated whole-of-life financial analysis considering all hard and soft costs.

Following the selection of a building owner to provide the accommodation solution, Inland Revenue continued the same collaborative approach until the accommodation solution design was completed.

See more on...