BSRIA User Group Member Soft Landings User Group Notes of Meeting 26 Jan 2011 These notes are not formal minutes, but a record of the presentations and the discussions that followed. The actions will inform future activities of the Group. Note that all outputs of the User Group are held on the Soft Landings Resource Share website (www.bsria.co.uk/resource-share/login/). Your login and (initial) password is your e-mail address in both cases. BSRIA will host the presentations for Members to download rather than e-mail them. It is always worthwhile keeping the resource-share as a browser favourite as BSRIA will be regularly populating the Soft Landings Resource Share with new and updated material. Present Nigel Anderson, BSRIA NigelA Steve Symonds, Kier W SteveS Roderic Bunn, BSRIA RodB Jeff Pearce, ZBP JeffP Gary Clark, Atkins GClark Sarah Birchall, BSRIA SaraB Mike Chater, Hants CC MikeC Gavin Lang, AECOM GLang David Stanley, BCU DaveS James Hepburn, BDP JHep Bill Bordass, UBT BillB Colwyn Knight, Castle Oak (part) ColK Greg Keeling, Essex CC GregK Derek Walker, Balfour Beatty DerekW Peter Tse, BSRIA PeteT David Thompson, Willmott Dixon DaveT James Parker, BSRIA JamesP Paul Beattie, Miller Construction PaulB Nick Gosling, Interserve NickG Nick Nisbet, AEC3 John Whyte, MJN Colston JWhyte Apologies Clive Wainwright, Interserve Howard Tinkler, SRM Munish Datta, M&S Lee Gwilliams, ESC Alasdair Donn, Willmott Dixon Stephen Gathergood, Interserve PS Julie Godefroy, HLP Tamsin Tweddell. Max Fordham Lee Hawkins, SRM Mark Savage, BAS Ashley Bateson, HLP James Warne, BDP Roger Carlin, Ashford Gp & CSA Martyn Brackenbury, Morgan Sindall Mark Way, CIC 1. Recap: Purpose of the Soft Landings User Group “User Group members are committed to ensuring that Soft Landings principles are applied on our new build and refurbishment projects, that operational outcomes match the design intentions, and that the expectations of the building’s end users are met” Welcome to new members: Morgan Sindall, Balfour Beatty, Miller Construction, Castle Oak Guest attendee: Nick Nisbet, AEC3 (speaker) Regular issues 2. The User Group should be about sharing good and bad experiences. Clients are requiring Soft Landings, and the User Group needs to help its Members respond in the right ways. Case studies are needed to support the argument for Soft Landings Methods are needed to aid design reviews. Matters Arising Gary Clark welcomed Nick Nisbet of AEC3 to the meeting. Gary Clark reminded Group members to record and share their experiences of applying Soft Landings using the User Group feedback forms. Roderic Bunn gave an introductory presentation to the Group. A reminder was made about the use of Soft Landings logos on letterheads and project documentation, primarily as a way of being a subliminal reminder to participants that they are on a Soft Landings project. Logos can be obtained by e-mail from BSRIA or directly via the Resource Share. Roderic Bunn reported that the Innovation and Growth Team (IGT) has recommended to government, in Recommendation 3.12 of the report Low Carbon Construction: “that Government and the industry should routinely embed the principles of Soft Landings into their contracts and processes, so that a building is not regarded as complete until it performs in accordance with its design criteria.” Government intends to respond to the IGT report L in April 2011. Members of the Soft Landings User Group are urged to maintain a watching brief on how this particular recommendation is interpreted in Government's response. Roderic Bunn also reported back on a meeting at CLG, where Soft Landings was presented to Anthony Burd, Head of technical policy, Paul Decort, Part L technical policy, Clover Summers, Zero-carbon new non-domestic buildings and Part L, David Craine, an economist working on Part L and zero carbon issues, Tracey Cull, Building Control System, Sandra Simoni, Building Control System and compliance issues, and Anthea Nicholson Zero carbon new non-domestic buildings. The CLG people were very interested and engaged, and understood the need Actions for SL, and also the current market limitations and barriers to its wider adoption. Roderic Bunn explained to both CLG and the User Group the view that certification (as with BREEAM) was not needed, but accreditation through a competency scheme probably was. CLG people were told directly that regulation is not required, but some awareness-raising by CLG and footnotes in Part L would be helpful. Roderic Bunn suggested that the chief construction advisor Paul Morrell needs to ensure that we have the right contractual framework for low carbon buildings to be delivered. Existing approaches to procurement, and contract forms that focus on time and money, are no longer fit for delivering wellperforming, low-carbon buildings. In this respect they have rapidly become obsolete. This requires revisions to NEC and JCT forms to foster more collaborative and integrated project teams. In response, Bill Bordass commented that those who do not engage in outcomes should not call themselves construction professionals. BillB is looking for funding to develop this with other institutions, such as a the CIC, "who might get the tectonic plates to move". Seasonal commissioning BSRIA's James Parker is now responsible for authoring BSRIA's guide to seasonal commissioning, and will be setting up a (largely virtual) steering group to advise and review the content. James explained that we will take a top-down approach, starting with building fabric and drilling down through the envelope elements to the main plant. JamesP to set up steering group, pen contents list, and circulate. Bill Bordass suggested that the process be more circular, where actions of main plant can affect how vents and other fabric elements perform, and vice versa. The content needs to reflect these inter-relationships. Roderic Bunn suggested that we would focus on that which seasonal commissioning identified as a latent defect, that which could be improved by tuning-up, and that which might require capital investment. Mike Chater suggested a fourth silo: requirements for changes to maintenance activities that are linked to the seasons. Seasonal commissioning may generate a schedule of responsibilities for FM. James Hepburn from BDP warned that facilities teams need to take responsibility for operating the building. Seasonal commissioning should not be an excuse for FMs to take a back seat and leave things to the Soft Landings team. This feeds into continual commissioning responsibilities for the building owner. Pitstopping Roderic Bunn apologised for the continued non-appearance of the Pitstopping methodology, but other work had intervened, including Australia. The guidance currently stood at around 40 pages, and only supporting diagrams and appendicies were needed. Roderic Bunn said he would have a draft completed for circulation at the March meeting. Soft Landings for Schools Bill Bordass reported on a Soft Landings for Schools meeting between six local authorities, hosted by UBT, on 30 November 2010. The provisional conclusions of the meeting were circulated. RodB to load onto the Resource Share The meeting suggested that one-page project case studies be generated to help clients and others considering adopting Soft Landings to understand the benefits, how they were obtained, and the pitfalls that need to be avoided in future. BSRIA has already produced two such data sheets, and more in the same vein are needed. Mike Chater said that Hants CC has four studies at different stages of the process that HCC could share, also 2 workstreams: Culture Change and Belief Building, led by Mike Chater, which could be used to help inform SL practice. Mike C said he has the authority to get on and do SL, but a change of culture to deliver it is vital. BSRIA to liaise with the Soft Landings User Group Members on their input to the guidance RodB to meet with MikeC to arrange datasheet content Soft Landings for Australia Roderic Bunn reported that the Soft Landings lecture tour of Australia and New Zealand organised by CIBSE ANZ, was a great success. As a consequence of the tour, CIBSE ANZ has formed its own User Group in Sydney. Its first task will be to produce an Australian version of the Framework. A live radio broadcast is available via www.usablebuildings.co. uk and via the Resource Share. Presentation: Nick Nisbet of AEC3 on Building Integrated Modelling and Soft Landings Nick Nisbet presented the latest in BIM, and how Soft Landings links to it. Nick described how BIM's great virtue is in capturing information in a continually usable form that would otherwise be lost. The information can be held in native format and linked to spaces or specific elements using spreadsheet datasets. The outputs of reality checking can be used to tag elements or as attached documents. The presentation is available via the SL Resource Share Soft Landings for Contractors The chair of the contractors sub-group, John Whyte, gave a verbal presentation on plans to generate guidance for contractors. John explained a variety of problems faced by contractors, including the lack of knowledge about Soft Landings by main contractors, lack of information to be able to respond properly to Soft Landings tenders, and problems where contractors are forced to take on retrospective design responsibilities. The main issues that need to be faced by the contractors group include managing SL relationships, SL wording in contracts, the differences between the ambitions of project leaders and the reality of site engineering, and the essential problems of doing Soft Landings for real. Everyone can see that SL is a good idea, but in reality it is very difficult to carry through, as key individuals so not have the right mindset. The opportunities are improved when the client sets out a clear requirement in documents and contracts. Three pieces of work were identified: 1. 2. 3. The creation of a model Soft Landings procurement process Additions to the BSRIA ITT and PQQ forms, filling in the current gap between RIBA Stages E to K Contractual clauses/wording The procurement process for the Birmingham City University (BCU) arts building is regarded (by those who tendered for it) to be worthy of becoming a model (generic) procurement process. The client, David Standley, agreed to RodB to issue invitation to contractors for a workshop session at Ecobuild Note: The contractors and schools sub-groups should meet in-between meetings of the main SL User Group and report back allow the BCU's approach to be used for the basis of this, once BCU had passed preferred bidder stage in May. (See below for more details.) (It is intended that BSRIA will put the documentation into a re-usable format, but add separate commentary from the bidders to the project where doing so would add value, or context, or suggestions of improvement.) WRAP consultation Roderic Bunn alerted the User group to the consultation process by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) and Zero Waste Scotland for a Carbon Efficiency Plan. WRAP has used the IGT's Soft Landings recommendation in Low Carbon Construction report to justify its proposal for new buildings to be designed and constructed under a Carbon Efficiency Plan. In this way, the broader aspects of Soft Landings have been compressed to fit beneath the narrow objective of carbon management, whereas the relationship is the other way around. BSRIA believes that building performance issues cannot all be seen through a carbon efficiency lens, and attempts to do so will result in issues of designing for usability, manageability and maintainability, in particular, being lost. RodB to contact DaveS and get documentation in May, and generate a draft Model Process for discussion at the June meeting of the User Group Contractors group to meet and revise PQQ and ITT forms www.wrap.co.uk/carbon efficientprocurement holds the consultation documents WRAP has also devised a set of PQQ and ITT questions for project teams, for all RIBA stages, the vast majority of which focus exclusively on carbon and completely miss all the Soft Landings design, pre-handover, graduated handover and fine-tuning activities described by Soft Landings. While the WRAP idea of a Carbon Efficiency Plan is helpful and virtuous in itself, it is very unhelpful in its attempt to translate Soft Landings (the process), into a CEP. The CEP should be marketed as a complementary process that augments Soft Landings (and indeed the RIBA Plan of Work). BSRIA intends to respond to WRAP directly. The Soft Landings User Group will respond separately via Gary Clark, and members are asked to view the WRAP consultation documents and share their thoughts with Gary. 3. Rod and Gary to e-mail User Group members to get responses before the deadline of 11 Feb 2011 Open discussion and User Group feedback Gary Clark facilitated a discussion with the Group on their experiences with Soft Landings and what they need to make it happen. This will be used to create a plan of action for the coming year. James Hepburn reported that BDP is involved in PFI bids with contractors. Soft Landings answers a lot of the questions posed by local authorities, which is good, but the PFI process is still a heavily contractual competitive bid process, so BDP is having to strike a fine balance. James sees procurement routes as being the main barrier to Soft Landings. On its education projects, BDP is finding that the programmes are too tight, too competitive and too complex, and this reduces the time for discussion. Contractors are only interested in the speedy delivery of construction information. Paul Beattie of Miller Construction said Miller is involved in 12 PCT healthcare schemes (between £5-15 million) and the ethos is to allow good time for design review and commissioning, However, some central elements of design have been cut out and rooms are now conventionally heated and ventilated. The design period is being compressed dramatically, and the budget cannot afford the prelims necessary to add value. The draft workplan will be available via the Resource Share Steve Symonds of Kier described Kier's initiatives. Generally, Soft Landings has got traction high up in Kier, which has found form in the Kier Care Commitment which is largely a good way of addressing risk on PFI projects, and which is intended to address classic divisions between design, engineering and FM by capturing information. In the SW, Kier has created a local feedback group for its projects. Kier is using the TSB's Building Performance Evaluation research programme to obtain funds for feedback studies. Estover college has been put forward for funding, and the project members are engaged to share the building performance lessons. Kier used Soft Landings at Estover to do a critical analysis of its handover process. David Stanley of Birmingham City University explained how Soft Landings is being used to procure a city centre campus building of 21 000 m2. DS said that the procurement has "turned the process upside down". They are at the end of Stage D, and will start on site in the summer. The original appointment of the consultants did not reflect Soft Landings, so BCU re-wrote the consultants appointments documentation. (The responses to the clauses and addendums varied...) BCU also laid out the SL responsibilities in the matrix up to Year 3 of the aftercare period. Consultants had to cost the matrix input, and the cost of their input was typically 1% on top of the consultant's fees of 10-12% of the budget. This was a large uplift. This is nevertheless seen by BCU as value-added investment as opposed to lost cost. BCU is currently attempting to appoint the main contractor for 3 years post PC, with full maintenance responsibility included. Another interesting modification was that the contractor's obligations were extended to include user familiarisation with controls. The project will use BIM, including phase 2. Gavin Lang said that AECOM is talking to clients about it, and find that they support Soft Landings up to PC, but it's the post PC period that's not being identified as an additional duty. Clients probably won't pay for it until it becomes embedded in ACE (section 12) for example. If SL was in ACE duties: "We might get a realistic reaction, as everyone would be bidding on a level playing field." Until then, consultants will be wary of increasing their bid costs and risk losing the job. David Thompson of Willmott Dixon explained that POE activities have been selective, but there is a push for doing POE on all projects, and encouraging consultants to get involved. Greg Keeling of Essex CC are trying to modify contract clauses, but can only do it by stealth. Essex has seen a 50% cut in their programme and are expected to deliver a 20% cut in costs, so the environment is hardly helpful. Essex also has a problem as academy buildings leave local authority control on handover, so it is not in the LA's interest to invest in operational cost benefits. However, Greg reported that Essex is renewing its Smart East Framework, and they are holding workshops where contractors are made aware of Soft Landings. Jeff Pearce of ZBP is introducing the broad principles of Soft Landings into the project information process, in the form of QA procedures, all the way through. Mike Chater reported that they are trying to communicate Soft Landings ideas on four projects. On one of them, close to completion, they are working with the contractor to develop a user-friendly building user handbook and building logbook. The content is being developed to be a clear as possible to the widest possible audience – occupants and managers. Nick Gosling of Interserve FM is trying to drive Soft Landings by demonstration of how it can raise efficiencies. The more effective Soft Landings is, the less the opportunity to cost it out, but the business case needs to be made. The problem with PFI schemes is that the process incentivises speed and low upfront cost, and no optimisation of energy efficiency or environmental benefits. 4 Date of next meeting 2 March 2011 at Ecobuild, afternoon. The User Group Meeting will be given over to a contractors workshop. Ecobuild presentations Chair: Roderic Bunn 10.45 – 10.50 Introduction to the Soft Landings User Group Gary Clark 10.50 – 11.15 What Soft Landings will achieve for a client Mike Chater, Senior Architect, Hampshire County Council 11.15 – 11.45 Soft Landings and environmental rating schemes Dr Julie Godfrey, Senior Sustainability Consultant, Hoare Lea 11.45 – 12.15 Soft Landings for Contractors John Whyte, Technical support, MGN Colston Next meetings o 16 June (London) o 8 Sept (London) Ends