The building industry faces mounting pressure to address its outsized environmental impact. By some estimates, construction and building operations already account for 42% of global carbon emissions, which means nearly half of all emissions worldwide stem from constructing, operating, or demolishing buildings. This impact is poised to grow dramatically: between 2020 and 2060, the world is expected to add 2.6 trillion square feet of new floor area to the global building stock, the equivalent of building a new New York City every month for 40 years. With three-quarters of 2050’s infrastructure yet to be built, the decisions made today about how to design, construct and operate buildings will shape emissions for decades to come.
Bergmeyer, which began as an architecture firm, has evolved beyond that traditional firm model and is pioneering a different approach. With an interdisciplinary structure that breaks down conventional barriers between specialties, the firm has transformed into a design collaborative that shapes how spaces are conceived, built, and renovated. But perhaps more importantly, Bergmeyer is leveraging its collaborative model to reshape how sustainable design is integrated into all aspects of the design process.
I recently spoke with Bergmeyer’s CEO Rachel Zsembery and Director of Corporate Social Responsibility Peter Nobile about how the firm is embedding sustainability thinking into their practice through this distinctive collaborative approach. We discussed in particular how at Bergmeyer, this isn’t a separate consideration but a fundamental part of their interdisciplinary design process. This collaborative mindset shapes everything from their approach to retail design, adaptive reuse of public buildings, or material selection processes that consider factors like embodied carbon, circularity, and chemical composition.
We discussed some of their projects, including a dining center at UMass Amherst which demonstrates how existing buildings can be repurposed or transformed to balance contemporary programmatic needs against creating entirely new structures which forfeit the embodied carbon assets of an existing structure. We also discussed how the firm’s engagement in policymaking and advocacy at local and national levels is helping advance progressive industry standards and addressing challenges faced by community planning processes. From their early adoption of the AIA 2030 commitment to their recent B Corp certification, Bergmeyer’s collaborative approach offers insights into how the building and design industry can more comprehensively address its environmental and social impacts.
Christopher Marquis: Can you start with what makes Bergmeyer different?
Rachel Zsembery: What is different about Bergmeyer is how we define ourselves – as a design collaborative rather than a traditional architecture, interior design, or design agency.
What’s unique about our position as a design collaborative, and why we decided to rebrand and shift our thinking about who we are as designers, is our ability to provide fully integrated services to clients. Many design agencies who lead with Architecture with a capital A will tell you they’re interdisciplinary.
But when most people say interdisciplinary, they mean multidisciplinary. They run a traditional practice – this is the studio where we practice architecture, this is the studio where we practice interior design, this is the studio where graphics happens, this is our sustainability team, and so on. Such an approach doesn’t break down silos or bring everybody to the table for co-creation. From a client’s standpoint, it still feels like hiring multiple agencies with work passed back and forth between groups.
Our goal in creating a design collaborative was to integrate our teams’ thinking around everything from sustainability to architecture to branding to interior design as one seamless process. I often forget who’s an architect and who’s an interior designer because people are used to sharing their expertise across multiple subject areas. We have less “stay in our lane” thinking, which leads to interesting client engagements.
We can say “yes” more often and can expand our markets because we’re not limited by thinking “this is the work we do in this market.” When we put together an industrial designer, a sustainability expert, and an architect to solve a problem, their collaboration often results in a wholly unique design solution. We also bring external subject matter experts and stakeholders to the table as part of this co-creation process. Design doesn’t just happen at Bergmeyer – it happens within client teams and communities they serve. They’re all part of our design team.
Marquis: That distinction between interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary is interesting and important for sustainability. It should be integrated throughout – from construction materials to finished materials. Can you say more about how your sustainability focus extends throughout the design process, and also how sustainability experts are part of design collaboratives? And please also share a project example where sustainability set you apart.
Zsembery: We create teams without siloed thinking. When we kick off projects and establish sustainability goals, we identify broad environmental and social values we’ll design towards – principles that become the North Star for evaluating success. We rarely push clients toward specific green building rating systems because in many cases they don’t fit their full range of environmental and social values – we’d rather find a tailored approach.
We work with the best elements from different systems- through Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Passive House principles, WELL building standards. We pick and choose for clients like we pick team members – to best meet stated goals and unlock creative thinking. This approach has changed our team’s requirements – we realized we must understand more tools because that overview helps unlock solutions early in the design process. The challenge all designers face is how to navigate budgetary challenges. We often work in the public realm and encounter projects with limited funding.
In most cases we don’t externalize sustainability work, we do it ourselves. And we learn from our own practice: in California, for example, the CALGreen code sets a high sustainability bar for all projects in the State. What we learn from working under those guidelines maps through the office to teams working on projects in other States.
By identifying upfront what sustainability values and elements align with an organization’s mission and public commitments, we find elements that enhance those broad project goals rather than pushing one agenda.
Peter Nobile: I think it is important to note that Bergmeyer chose to become a Certified B Corp (in 2024), because those certification criteria align closely with our mission, which for example does not prioritize environmental stewardship over community impact. The challenge of sustainability is equally about efficient buildings and the impacts the building supply chain makes on all stakeholders. We need to improve sustainability performance all around but in concert with how we operate as a company and how we impact the communities we live in and serve, not at the expense of one over another.
Marquis: The discussion about public work is helpful. Any project or two you could talk about?
Zsembery: An interesting project might be the student dining center we did for UMass Amherst. Much of our work is adaptive reuse, especially in public higher ed with mid-20th-century buildings. We’re brought in to evaluate if buildings can meet current student population needs for dormitories, dining halls, student centers.
The original design of these buildings often lack communal gathering space. For example, a dormitory design may have focused on maximizing occupancy numbers. In addition, these buildings were built to last but lack infrastructure for current energy systems technology. We need to balance many priorities: making spaces accessible, adding life safety upgrades, creating spaces for group learning activities and different learning styles, and making buildings energy efficient and sustainable – all while enhancing the user experience and amplifying the university’s mission.
We try to maximize infrastructure reuse while investing in better and more durable materials. With dining halls, we work with student dining programs on building electrification projects, helping these client groups ensure operational efficiency by reducing utility demands. We take a wide lens to budget disbursement.
Marquis: Sometimes it’s cheaper to tear down and start new. How do you help clients understand retrofitting existing buildings?
Zsembery: We all know that many studies show that the greenest building is already standing: there’s significant embodied carbon and energy in existing building stock. We need to help clients think not just 20 years but 50-80 years ahead.
We completed a retail project on Newbury Street in Boston for RH, in a Civil War era building was among first built after Back Bay was filled. It was an incredible building to save but challenging to make work for current operations. Through the design and infrastructure planning, the team was able to preserve many historical elements to retain and augment the building’s unique identity while marrying it with the retailer’s brand identity and operational needs while simultaneously repairing and augmenting the infrastructure and accessibility of the building so that it will be capable of serving the community for another 175 years.
Nobile: these days, when we work on such projects, we run multiple design and construction scheduling and system options using through our BIM (Building Information Modeling) system to help clients find the right balance points between their vision and their budget. The data isn’t at the level of EU taxonomy, but it doesn’t need to be and almost always proves out to be less expensive over time to renovate versus build new. Things like ten-foot floor-to-floor heights present real challenges, but usually there’s a creative solution lurking around.
Marquis: How about technology? This must be an area with lots of change from software systems to new materials. Can you comment on how changing technology affects your work?
Nobile: Like most designers, we’re working with various Life Cycle Analysis and embodied energy/carbon tools, some of which are embedded in the BIM (building information modeling) software we are using. The hope is that as these tools evolve we’ll be able to routinely track performance on several fronts as we go; that we’ll be able to investigate the entire design and construction process, just as we are collectively making progress on specifying less energy- and toxic-intensive materials through alignment with what is known as the Common Materials Framework. We’re 14-year signatories to the AIA 2030 commitment which focuses on moving the building industry to net-zero emissions, even though it is clear that the profession as a whole won’t hit the 2030 target unless we become more aggressive.
Regarding materials and technology, the AIA is working with many organizations to create an Architecture and Design Materials Transparency platform, which aligns with the Common Materials Framework, resulting in a huge relational database that looks at materials through the lenses of human health, climate health, social health & equity, circularity, and ecosystem health. Using these technologies, I think it is safe to say that sustainability is no longer seen as separate from our practice – it’s fully integrated into our approach.
Zsembery: We focus on three primary issues when making materials choices: carbon, circularity, and chemistry/composition. For carbon, are we able to wisely use the embodied carbon in a material over its entire life cycle? For circularity, can we use less raw material, are we envisioning reuse scenarios, or asking what a material can become once its intended use is complete? For chemistry – what harmful chemicals enter the world during manufacturing or are embedded within a material and are then released during use or at end of life?
We work with manufacturers to help clients make choices aligned with their company and project goals. Is a client or a project particularly focused on indoor air quality? Material longevity? Recycled content? Energy harvesting? Zero Waste? It’s a balancing act – you might have a material with lower embodied carbon or toxicity, but application creates significant waste. We set goals at the project outset: if reducing PFAS or eliminating PVC are important, we’ll work toward those ends.
Marquis: Your industry intersects with policy as well. The interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary distinction definitely shows examples where you are working with different industry partners. What is your role in changing policy and industry standards?
Zsembery: We’re involved at local civic, regional, national, and global levels. As you noted, the AIA 2030 commitment tracks energy use in every one of our projects. Our former president, Mike Davis, was an AIA delegate to COP26, advocating architecture’s role in addressing climate crisis.
Many of our team members engage civically and locally because our corporate values emphasize volunteerism. As designers we serve communities both impacted by client work and where we live. Our team members volunteer on planning boards, for professional organizations like the Boston Society of Architects, on state/regional policy efforts, on parks and recreation groups, in setting open space requirements, on issues like solar bylaws that dovetail with building codes. We address housing issues especially in the states where our offices are located, across Massachusetts, California, and Ohio.
Nobile: We have strong internal peer support for those who serve on planning boards. We all know that civic volunteer work can be challenging at times, but there’s a real commitment at Bergmeyer to taking on community leadership roles. Local civic organizations give us opportunities to bring design thinking into the public realm, opening up dialogues with people who might never have considered perspectives from designers before.
Zsembery: Setting policy standards in local or regional communities often means considering sustainability requirements for developers building at different scales. Can we develop incentives or other opportunities as developers increase sustainable building commitments? In Massachusetts, there’s a fossil-free fuel pilot program many towns and cities elected to join. We learn from our local municipal involvements, bringing that into our nationwide practice – about all sorts of challenges and opportunities whether moving to all-electric buildings or integrating roof-ready electric solar and hot water systems.
Nobile: Being in Massachusetts biases us a little bit practicing in other parts of the country because we’ve got fairly progressive public policy standards in place. The challenge of a national practice is that local or state systems can override national or international building standards. Every state tailors codes for perceived regional needs. As a nationwide company, we have to understand and flex our design approach based on differences between jurisdictions; it can be city by city, town by town, or by county or region. Some municipalities push us all forward, resulting in internal case studies showing how stringent requirements don’t necessarily stifle development or creativity. It’s a trade-off. Take the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) – people think it’s building code, but it’s actually a set of program-based guidelines. The real purpose is making buildings accessible to more people. While there are technical guidelines, what really matters is understanding the spirit behind them. Ideally this mindset translates to codes driving sustainability. The key is knowing what others are doing – we often find we can exceed code requirements without increasing costs, simply through better design choices.
Marquis: Switching gears a little bit. You’re employee owned. How does it affect sustainability commitment? And also, why did you become a B Corp?
Zsembery: Independence matters. Many mid-sized agencies face a cliff when it comes to leadership transition forcing them into mergers or acquisitions by larger public corporations. We pride ourselves in intentionally planning for our future as an independent design collaborative, practicing in a way that is aligned with our values, staying nimble enough to make choices like becoming B Corp, shifting our governance model to reflect our values and purpose. We are not an ESOP – not every individual is a shareholder, but a sizable percentage of our team are shareholders who feel a deep connection to our corporate values. We’ve created a place where people can bring their whole selves to work.
B Corp certification was a natural evolution for us because we value transparency in our practice and operations. Our employees have wide access to and understanding of the firm’s financial information and client contract arrangements because we want them to understand in both practical and profound ways how the firm operates. We’re proud of and try to display our ethics and values in every project engagement. Our business model enriches the design process through the interdependence of specialties and markets. Looking into B Corp, we saw an alignment in thinking about global interdependence and making the world better, using our business for good change – again, it was a natural values alignment. Our shareholders supported exploring and ultimately pursuing certification.
Nobile: The B Corp certification process really opened our eyes – we saw how some of our existing practices could become policies, part of our governance. We brought in our first outside board member as a public benefit director, which sharpened our thinking about impact on both internal teams and external communities.
We’re just over 100 people, with about 40 shareholders – that’s a large percentage, and we’re completely owned without outside investors. We’re also a Massachusetts benefit corporation, something we had undertaken before B Corp certification.
Bergmeyer’s value system mapped clearly to the five B Corp Impact Areas structure. Looking at our B Corp impact assessment scorecard was fascinating as it revealed aspects of our work we didn’t realize were unique. I think the architecture profession as a whole could benefit from looking into the B Corp system as a practice model – some firms are already B Corp adjacent. The AIA National Conference is coming to Boston in June of 2025, and we’re excited to be hosting other B Corp architects – certified, in progress, or simply curious – during the convention.
Marquis: What future challenges do you see relating to sustainability?
Zsembery: We work with many brands in food and beverage, retail, and hospitality that have made thoughtful public commitments to sustainability. While these brands excel in making sustainable products, packaging, and sometimes operations, they often don’t invest at the same level in making their physical locations sustainable. This presents both a challenge and opportunity for us – especially now through the B Corp lens – to build knowledge and create easier ways for clients to integrate sustainability principles, pragmatically aligned with their corporate goals, into real estate and consumer environment decisions.
Looking at their existing and future real estate portfolios, we’re focused on driving change at scale. Over the coming years, we’re engaged in discussing how these companies’ sustainability commitments evolve. Our goal is to provide enhanced sustainable design services to companies that share our values and help them invest in better solutions for their building portfolios.
Nobile: As Rachel notes, we are digesting our clients’ ESG and other reporting data to understand more deeply what drives their sustainability decision-making processes. Our multinational clients face different requirements in the EU versus the US, and we want to help them align their values and create a consistent approach regardless of local regulations. This is fresh territory for us, but it’s exciting – we learn something new from every ESG report we read.
Marquis: It’s interesting and important how you’re thinking about a company’s broader environmental impact. Companies typically focus on their products, but you help them think more broadly about their stores and headquarters. I noticed your website showcases experience centers for brands – that seems like a great opportunity to demonstrate sustainable design’s value.
Nobile: Yes. At its core, our product is about creating human experiences. Success means designing spaces where our clients’ customers or patrons or guests feel good, restored, grounded.
Zsembery: Today’s consumers are more sophisticated about sustainability. When a company markets sustainable clothing or beauty products, customers now ask questions about the store environment itself. They notice the disconnect when a sustainable product sits on a display made from synthetic molded-plastic.
We’re developing tools to help clients understand where they are now and where they could be in making their buildings and spaces impactful in meaningful, sustainable ways. This helps them move step by step toward making authentic statements about their built environment that match their corporate environmental commitments. We think the time has come for more brands to invest in sustainable buildings and built environments just as they’ve invested in developing and offering sustainable products – and Bergmeyer is the kind of interdisciplinary, values-driven design agency who can help them get there.