Involving facilities managers and occupiers in the building design process could help avoid costly mistakes
by Phil Ratcliffe
24 January 2008
Our experience at Procore shows that developers – and particularly agents – insist that buildings are fully fitted out to Category A (Cat A) standards in order to improve their marketability. Almost without exception, when the tenant subsequently takes the space,many of these Cat A materials are discarded, replaced by a tenant-preferred specification – hardly sustainable building.
The worst case recently was a 45,000 sq ft fit-out in Staines. The agent advising the landlord suggested carpeting the whole building in a cheap blue product, only for the tenant to throw it all away. The same applied to light fittings and much of the suspended ceilings.
Building design as well does not seem to take into account how 90 per cent of occupancy works. Buildings for developers are designed open plan, yet most occupants need offices and other cellular space. It is understandable that the landlord/developer cannot predict future fixed layouts of a potential tenant, however, they can assist by encouraging building systems that cope with cellularisation and acoustic enhancements far better than the traditional Cat A specification.
The main opportunity to embrace sustainability is in overall building design. The idea of including the people who will run and manage the building after completion is often mooted, but rarely implemented. By not involving the occupier in the main design and delivery, fit-outs are often designed without simple, practical operational/FM matters being considered.
However, there are signs that his is changing. We are engaged on a project as facilities consultant, working with the design team of a building not due for completion until early 2010. Our brief is to represent FM in its design and delivery.
Another area that fit-outs often fail to address is quality of construction. Fit-out is like a giant Lego set, piecing components together quickly, which often means that the quality of the end product suffers. In fact, it makes me ask, where have all the CoWs gone?
In mainstream construction, the good old-fashioned role of the clerk of works is still common. Historically, the clerk of works, or CoW, helps to achieve required quality standards. Working with the architect, the CoW would be on-site checking the quality of installations on behalf of the designer and client.
I believe that this is an important – perhaps vital – role. So when it comes to workplace projects why are CoWs almost always nowhere to be seen?
This absence is odd. These types of projects often require someone to look at quality. They have fast-track programmes, with a lot of the work completed out-of-hours. Many aspects of a design may be installed and then rapidly concealed. When do traditional designers get to check on the quality of installations?
Fast-track should not mean sloppy quality. Perhaps a quality expert may help all parties to deliver projects that satisfy the main aims of time, cost – and quality.
Phil Ratcliffe is MD of Procore
website
website
