Unpopular Thought?

Sustainability is nonetheless a huge emphasis in architectural design today.  However, it’s a topic that I am torn on.  I absolutely agree with the thought of sustainability and the way it is to be considered in design.  For example, sun paths and building orientation to use less electricity and generate more of a passive heating and cooling system.   Using solar panels and other resources, using economical standards, and using recycled material or water technology, just to name a few factors.  Sure, that is great to address and should absolutely be at that, however I do not think that sustainability should be the ultimate driving factor in design.  For instance, what if you as an architect were conflicted choosing between two materials… one promoted sustainability and building efficiency (maybe recycled) but was nothing special to the building or location, but on the opposing side there’s an amazing material that is less friendly for the environment, or more expensive, but fits with the overall goal of the building better. (Maybe it fits better into the phenomenology aspect.). Which do you use?  

I feel like most architects today would do what is more environmentally friendly and sustainable, even if it lessens the meaning of the space.  I honestly do not know, and I feel that it can be argued amongst different circumstances, but it’s just a thought that I crosses my mind when working on studio projects, and projects within the professional realm.  I think the push of sustainability in architecture has really exposed some great opportunities and really cool elements of design, however I am still not 100% sold that it needs to be the driving factor.  I believe there is a balance.  I don't want the beauty of architecture and design and the way that it can be interacted and inspiring upon users to be limited by sustainability drivers and regulations.  Maybe it never will, again just my (unpopular?) thoughts.