Upload
others
View
8
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
BSRIA BG 54/2014
www.softlandings.org.uk
www.bsria.co.uk
the Soft Landings Framework for better briefing, design, handover and building
performance in-use
UBTUBUBTTUsable Buildings Trust
Cover 2014 UBT_Soft Landings cover.qxd 05/03/2014 12:18 Page 2
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 3
The Soft Landings Framework was authored by Mark Way of the DarwinConsultancy and Bill Bordass of the Usable Buildings Trust, with assistancefrom Adrian Leaman of Building Use Studies and Roderic Bunn of BSRIA. This 2014 edition includes minor amendments over the versionpublished in 2009, notably a revised Table 1 to match the version in BG 45/2014 How to Procure Soft Landings and align with the guidance in BG 6/2014 Design Framework for Building Services. The Soft Landings Stage 2: Design worksheet, written for BG 45/2014, is also now included.
Development of the Soft Landings Framework was led by an industry TaskGroup convened by BSRIA and comprising the following organisations:
Acknowledgements
ArupBSRIABuro HappoldCarillionCIBSEUniversity of Cambridge EstateManagement and Building ServicesMott MacDonald GroupDavis Langdon & EverestEdward Cullinan Architects AECOM
Fielden Clegg Bradley ArchitectsGardiner & TheobaldHoare Lea PartnershipMaceMax Fordham & PartnersRMJMScott Wilson Kirkpatrick & CoShepherd ConstructionWhitby Bird and PartnersWilliam Bordass AssociatesW S Atkins
This Framework is based on the Soft Landings methodology devised by MarkWay and developed in 2003/04 with a Soft Landings Steering and SupportGroup comprised of the following organisations:
AECOMAnn Bodkin Sustainability + ArchitectureArupBennetts AssociatesBSRIACIBSEDarwin ConsultancyDavis Langdon ConsultingEdward Cullinan Architects
Fielden Clegg Bradley StudiosFulcrum ConsultingHammersonLand SecuritiesMax Fordham LLPUniversity of CambridgeUsable Buildings TrustWillmott Dixon Group
the Soft Landings Frameworkfor better briefing, design, handover and building
performance in-use
All rights reserved. Although this work in its entirety is subject to thepublisher’s copyright, permission is granted to users to reproduce andmodify extracts for practical application. Unless otherwise agreed with thepublisher all published extracts must carry the following acknowledgment:“Reproduced from the Soft Landings Framework, published by BSRIA andauthored by the Usable Buildings Trust.”
BSRIA BG 54/2014 March 2014 ISBN 978-0-86022-730-4Printed by Imagedata Group
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 4
4 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
Located on a rural site on the edge of Bath, the headquarters for Wessex Water wasdesigned to meet the company’s long-term business plan. This placed sustainability at thecentre of the company’s operations. As a consequence, the project not only consideredenvironmental issues but also a wide range of social and economic factors, such as staffinteraction within the office, the relationship with neighbours, and the ability of thebuilding to adapt to future change.
Throughout the project the client ensured that the end users were consulted to inform thebrief and to respond to design development. Key members of the client’s team includedrepresentatives of the facilities management and IT departments, all of whom engaged indebate and discussion on how to extract the best from the new building. This covered notonly the initial period of occupation but also the flexibility required to accommodate futureneeds. Drilling down into all such operational issues ensured that there was a thoroughunderstanding of how the building was intended to work. Incoming staff were advised ofthe operating principles and details of their new workspace.
The three year post-occupancy evaluation was conducted jointly by the client, design,construction and maintenance team.
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 6
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 5
Introduction
Why bother with Soft Landings?
Perhaps it was the 2009 bi-centenary of Charles Darwin’s birth, rather than therecession, that prompted thoughts about evolution and survival of the fittest,but it struck me that his observations could equally apply to buildings.
As an industry, we have often seemed incapable of learning about theperformance of our own creations, with the inevitable result that buildingsregularly fail to meet their owners’ operational expectations or, worse, aredemolished less than a generation after their completion. For those outside theindustry the idea of continual improvement - ploughing back the lessons fromone completed project to the next - must be obvious but, with few exceptions,this is rarely done by an industry too obsessed by capital cost. Shortcomings inbasic requirements such as comfort, energy consumption and adaptability arenot only irritating and costly in their own right, but also undermine attemptsto achieve high levels of sustainability.
There are reasons for optimism. The need for lower-carbon buildings is rapidlyestablishing a culture for measurement of energy that is a stone’s throw fromgreater knowledge about performance in general. Systematic, post-occupancyevaluation is widely recognised to be a hugely important step in the rightdirection, but it needs to be linked to a rational methodology for assessing thebriefing, design and commissioning stages. This is where Soft Landings comesinto its own, closing the loop between design, construction, operation, feedbackand into design again. As the title suggests, the raison-d’être of Soft Landings isto provide better buildings and a more effective service to the client. Particularthanks are due to Michael Dickson for encouraging its development and toBuro Happold for its financial support.
It became clear to me during the last major recession in the early 1990s thatoccupiers who had a choice due to the abundance of surplus property wouldalways go for the building that was well considered and highly functional. Thecurrent recession is following a similar pattern, so surely the subtext for theindustry should be to embrace the knowledge gained from performanceassessment and turn it into competitive advantage. Only the best buildings willsurvive in the long term.
Rab Bennetts, Bennetts Associates, June 2009
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 7
6 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
Soft Landings was being developed with the support of the Director of Estates at theUniversity of Cambridge while the Centre for Mathematical Sciences was beingconstructed. The phased development of the Centre and a ‘no blame’ attitude adopted bythe client permitted a continual assessment of the emerging design in actual physicalperformance and user expectation.
Following completion of the first phase, a post-occupancy evaluation was carried out tomeasure the building performance of the recently occupied buildings. As part of this studyan occupant survey and a full building pressure test was also conducted. Many of theresults were incorporated into design changes for the subsequent building phases.
The final appraisal revealed that the occupants and the University viewed the project as agreat success.
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 8
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 7
08 The birth of Soft Landings
10 Background to Soft Landings
13 Introduction to the procedure
16 Stage 1: Inception and briefing
18 Stage 2: Design development and review
20 Stage 3: Pre-handover
22 Stage 4: Initial aftercare
24 Stage 5: Years 1 - 3 Extended aftercare and POE
26 Appendix A: Example worksheetsStage 1: Inception and briefingStage 2: DesignStage 3: Pre-handoverStage 4: Initial aftercareStage 5: Extended aftercare years 1-3
Contents
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 9
8 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
As an architect I used to design buildings, get them built, hand them over, andthen move on to the next job. This was rarely the end of the matter: I had torespond to things that came up during the defects liability period, and helpwith the final account – routine procedures that had to be followed. Along withmost of my fellow professionals, my post-handover connection with thebuilding in use was largely reactive. However, I felt that the accumulation ofexperience could be put to better use if one could head off issues before theyhappened. This meant knowing more about the building in use.
In the late 1990s, as a project director, I found myself regularly calling in tocheck progress with the client at the tail end of a particularly leading-edgebuilding RMJM had designed for a major pharmaceutical company. My teamhad put a lot of brainpower into the project and it would be a pity if this wasundermined by the usual post-handover minor glitches that could easily beallowed to mutate into chronic problems. This happened to coincide with aprolonged user occupation programme and offered a golden opportunity to bearound while staff were beginning to work there. I borrowed a typical office asa base and used its facilities just like any member of staff, while observing thebuilding in use and the occupants at work.
This short period in residence was a transforming experience, providing majorinsights that I had suspected, but not experienced in thirty years of professionalpractice. I saw people not understanding how things were supposed to work,such as the BMS-linked solar blinds, and was able to explain the design intentto them. I could often spot things not working properly before the users did,such as over-zealous presence-detected lighting, head-off potential problems,and organise follow-up. I learnt about things that were good but which usersdidn’t understand. I found well-intended design features that fell at the firstfence when used by non-architects, in other words the average building user.
In a subsequent project at Cambridge University, David Adamson, the Directorof Estates, asked me to give one of a series of lectures. It was around the timeof the last financial crisis and there was much talk of hard or soft landing ofthe global economy (where clearly lessons are not learnt). I picked up thetheme in my talk, and Soft Landings for buildings was born.
The Soft Landings researchDavid Adamson then wondered whether the approach might become more of astandard procedure, which resulted in the next stage of development. Supportedby the University Estates Department I led a project guided by a panel ofdesigners, project managers and client representatives that investigated whatmight need to be done. In time, we were joined by Bill Bordass of the UsableBuildings Trust (UBT), and the team drew on a rather similar idea known asSea Trials, together with other recommendations from the PROBE series ofpost-occupancy surveys.
In 2004 we produced preliminary documentation, in the form of a scope ofservice document set for Soft Landings1. Since then, team members and othershave been applying parts of the service in some of their projects. The resultshave been insightful, but mostly restricted to the firms that were members ofthe original development team, and those in close touch with them.2
The birth of Soft Landings
1THE WORKSHEETS IN THE APPENDIX ARE FROM THIS SOURCE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DESIGN WORKSHEET2 THE AWARENESS-RAISING DOCUMENTS ON SOFT LANDINGS, PUBLISHED IN 2008 BY BSRIA AND THE USABLEBUILDINGS TRUST, INCLUDE EXAMPLES FROM TWO AWARD-WINNING BUILDINGS: THE MATHEMATICS FACULTY ATCAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY, AND HEELIS, THE NATIONAL TRUST'S HEAD OFFICE IN SWINDON.
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 10
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 9
When we began, some expected us to come up with a completely newprocurement process. The difficulty of this soon became apparent as a widerange of contracts and processes are already deeply embedded with standardforms, agreed procedures and so on. So, at best, Soft Landings was likely to beregarded as yet another process among many. Instead, we saw it as a goldenthread which could run alongside any procurement process, improving thesetting of design targets, the managing of expectations with a focus onoutcomes, reinforcing activities in the weeks immediately before and afterhandover, and providing a natural route for feedback and post-occupancyevaluation.
Some were keen to explore whether financial penalties could be attached tothe attainment of agreed performance targets. After considering this in somedepth, we recommended against it, owing to the expense of setting-up alegally-defensible system, uncertainties about metrics, the difficulties in dividingany responsibility for outcomes between all the parties concerned (not least theoccupiers and facilities managers), and the fact that the industry is (as yet)largely unfamiliar with the true in-use performance of the buildings itproduces. Instead, we felt that Soft Landings needed to be undertaken in aspirit of learning and continuous improvement, or possibly with a financialincentive which would be easier to organise and to share out than a penalty.After a few years, designers and builders may have become sufficientlyconfident to be able to offer guaranteed performance. But to start with, weneed to learn in a no-blame situation, otherwise onerous requirements mayactually stifle the purposeful innovation that we need to produce betterbuildings with far fewer environmental consequences.
Next stepsWith the challenges of more sustainable buildings now hard upon us, there hasbeen increasing interest in scaling-up Soft Landings. In response to this, BSRIAoffered support to me and the Usable Buildings Trust to help widen the scopeand knowledge of Soft Landings by convening an industry group and helpingto prepare a publication and an implementation plan. This Framework is the fruitof these efforts and sets the overall scene. Detailed development will be tailoredto the needs of specific contexts.
The world is becoming aware of the need to reduce building energy use andcarbon emissions. There is also growing interest in post-occupancy evaluation(POE). Less well-appreciated is the fundamental importance of integratedfeedback, and the feed-forward of lessons learned into the construction andhandover periods. These actions are central to ensuring that sustainablestrategies work in practice.
I hope that this framework for Soft Landings will interest and inspire clients,designers, builders, occupiers and managers around the world, and will be ofimmediate practical utility to those who want to make building design andconstruction more performance-driven. It should help to narrow the credibilitygaps that often yawn between expectations and outcomes. In the longer term, Ihope that more detailed documentation and services will evolve to support theapplication of Soft Landings principles in a widening range of procurementprocesses by different people, in different sectors, and in different countries.
Mark Way, June 2009
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 11
There is a growing realisation that sustainability, energy efficiency and theoverall performance of new and existing buildings needs to improve radically.Clients, governments, and society are looking to the construction industry tomeet increasingly challenging targets: for owners as robust sustainableinvestments, to satisfy occupiers, and to tread lightly on the environment.
Unfortunately, the construction industry and its clients do not yet have theright structures in place to deliver these improvements reliably. Surveys ofrecently completed buildings regularly reveal massive gaps between client anddesign expectations and delivered performance, especially energy performance.
There are many reasons for this, including:
● Many designers do not take sufficient account of how occupiers use andmanage buildings and the equipment they introduce1.
● Achieved performance is becoming increasingly dependent on technology,which often needs careful attention if it is to work as intended. Pre-handovercommissioning is seldom enough.
● Solutions that look good in design calculations can often prove to be toocomplicated to be manageable, both through the design and delivery processand particularly in use. Designers can easily forget that management is a scarceresource, as can those procuring clients who do not have a direct involvementin building operation.
An underlying problem is that designers and builders are normally employed toproduce or to alter buildings, and are expected to go away as soon as the workis physically complete and handed over. They are seldom asked or paid tofollow-through afterwards, to pass on their knowledge to occupiers andmanagement, or to learn from the interaction. Consequently, the industry doesnot unlock all the value in the buildings it creates. Nor does it fully understandwhat it is creating, what works well, and what needs to be improved.
In the process, the industry is also missing opportunities for improving theknowledge base for its people, its organisations, and indeed for everybody. Onemight be tempted to blame the industry for this, but the causes are moredeeply rooted, making it difficult for anybody to step far out of line.
The rigid separation between construction and operation means that manybuildings are handed over in a state of poor operational readiness and suffer ahard landing, particularly – as often happens – when delays have led to thetelescoping of the commissioning period. Problems can be worst wherecomplicated or unfamiliar techniques and technologies are used and nobodycan understand why, or what they need to do. If the problems are not dealtwith rapidly, occupants' initial enthusiasm can easily turn into disappointment.
Background to Soft Landings
The UBT's studies of buildings in use suggest thatthey fall into four main groups.
TYPE A: These are complicated, require lots ofmanagement to look after the complication, andget it. They can work well, but tend to beexpensive to run and fragile, as theirperformance can collapse in bad times.
TYPE B: These are less complicated, require lesseffort to run, and are more robust. We needmany more of these, particularly in the publicsector, as high maintenance is ultimatelyunaffordable and unsustainable.
TYPE C: This is unfortunately where all too manybuildings that aspire to be Type A end up. Theyare too complicated, need too much money andmanagement to look after, and end updelivering poor value.
TYPE D: These buildings receive more care andattention than they deserve. They are procured,designed, built, operated and often occupied bydedicated enthusiasts. They can achieveexcellent performance- and sometimes they aredemonstration projects - but they are notnecessarily replicable in the real world.
As a general rule, beware Type A, try to do moreof Type B, avoid Type C, and question Type D.
Designing for manageabilityA note by the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT)
1 FOR EXAMPLE, DESIGN ENERGY ESTIMATES OFTEN ONLY REPORT THE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOADSSUBJECT TO BUILDING REGULATIONS, AND EVEN THEN OPTIMISTICALLY. THE UNREGULATED AND OCCUPIER LOADSFREQUENTLY GO UNREPORTED.
10 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 13
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 11
Doing things differentlyTo meet these changing expectations, and to reduce the gaps between predictedand achieved performance, the design and construction professions must notonly focus on technical inputs, but put much more emphasis on in-useperformance strategies. The desired operational outcomes need to be consideredat the very earliest stages of procurement, managed right through the projectand reviewed in use.
This culture shift in the way buildings are delivered will require:
● Better and more direct understanding of how buildings are actually used andmanaged
● Integration of follow-through and feedback into clients’ appointments andindustry procurement processes
● Better review and reality-checking and fine-tuning during the procurementprocess
● Closer links between design, construction, operation, research anddevelopment, so that experience gained on all projects is rapidly internalised,digested and fed-forward to inform existing projects and future work.
The industry and its clients must move fast: especially to reduce greenhouse gasemissions, which otherwise threaten to trigger rapid climate change. Thechallenge is immense and time is short: buildings last a long time, but theindustry changes slowly. The required alterations are radical, but we need waysof making an orderly transition from existing procedures to improvedprocedures.
The purpose of Soft LandingsSoft Landings can be used for new construction, refurbishment and alteration. Itis designed to smooth the transition into use and to address problems that post-occupancy evaluations (POE) show to be widespread. It is not just about bettercommissioning and fine tuning, though for many buildings commissioning canonly be completed properly once the building has encountered the full range ofweather and operating conditions.
Soft Landings starts by raising awareness of performance in use in the earlystages of briefing and feasibility, helps to set realistic targets, and assignsresponsibilities. It then assists the management of expectations through design,construction and commissioning, and into initial operation, with particularattention to detail in the weeks immediately before and after handover.Extended aftercare, with monitoring, performance reviews and feedback helpsoccupants to make better use of their buildings, while clients, designers, buildersand managers gain a better understanding of what to do next time.SoftLandings can run alongside any procurement process, potentially in any country.It also provides a natural route for POE and feedback.
Soft Landings provides additional support throughout the process, especially:
● During inception and briefing, to establish client and design targets which arebetter-informed by performance outcomes in use on previous projects. It alsocommits those joining the design and building team to follow-through after
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 14
12 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
handover and for project management to begin to allocate responsibilities forongoing reviews of design intent and anticipated performance, and to preparefor the other activities required.
● Alongside the design and construction process, to review performanceexpectations as the client’s requirements, design solutions, and management anduser needs become more concrete and the inevitable changes are made. Inaddition the team must plan for commissioning, handover and aftercare, andinvolve the occupier much more closely in decisions which affect operation andmanagement.
● In the weeks before and after handover. Although practical completion isimportant legally and contractually, with Soft Landings handover is no longerthe end of the job, but just an event in the middle of a more extendedcompletion stage. Before handover, the team prepares to deliver the buildingand its systems in a better state of operational readiness. When the occupantsbegin to move in, the aftercare team (or team member) will have a designatedworkplace in the building and be available at known times to explain designintent, answer questions, and to undertake or organise any necessarytroubleshooting and fine-tuning. Both before and after handover, the design andbuilding team will work closely with client, occupiers, and facilities managersto share experiences and smooth the transition into use.
● During the first three years of occupancy: to monitor performance, to help todeal with any problems and queries, to incorporate independent post-occupancy surveys (such as occupant satisfaction, technical and energyperformance), and to discuss, act upon and learn from the outcomes.Achievements and lessons should then be carried back to inform the industryand its clients.
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 15
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 13
Introduction to the Soft Landings process
Why use Soft Landings?Soft Landings helps clients and occupiers to get the best out of their new oraltered buildings. It is designed to reduce the tensions and frustrations that sooften occur during initial occupancy, and which can easily leave residualproblems that persist indefinitely. At its core is a greater involvement ofdesigners and constructors with building users and operators before, during andafter handover of building work, with an emphasis on improving operationalreadiness and performance in use.
Soft Landings is not just a handover protocol. It also provides the golden threadwhich links between:
● The procurement process: setting and maintaining client and designaspirations that are both ambitious and realistic, and managing them throughthe whole procurement process and into use
● Initial occupation, providing support, detecting problems, and undertakingfine-tuning; and
● Longer-term monitoring, review, post-occupancy evaluation (POE) andfeedback – drawing important activities into the design and constructionprocess which are both rare in themselves and often disconnected.
Other important but less directly tangible benefits include client retentionowing to the improved levels of service, greater mutual understanding betweendesigners, builders, clients, occupiers and managers, education of design andproject team members in what works well and what may be causing difficulties.It also helps to develop industry skills in problem diagnosis and treatment.
What is special about it?Soft Landings is embedded in the entire procurement process from initial scopeto well beyond project completion. Conventionally, buildings are simplyhanded over to the client and the design and building team walk aw ay, never tocome back, except to deal with snags or reported failures. By contrast, SoftLandings helps to:
● Minimise the chances of unsatisfactory performance by strengthening thevulnerable areas of traditional scopes of service, which too often result inoccupier complaints downstream.
● Address and even pre-empt problems during the early occupation phase, byproviding an on-site designer/contractor representative or team that can assistoccupiers and management.
● Ensure that lessons from closer interaction with the occupiers – and fromevaluating actual building performance in use – are learnt and shared to thebenefit of all stakeholders.
Soft landings helps to bring things togetherMany techniques of project feedback and post-occupancy evaluation (POE) areaimed at one particular stage of a project or to suit a single discipline orelement such as building services engineering. Many are used solely in thepost-occupation phase when it is too late to tackle the strategic problems thatoriginated in briefing, design and project management. Soft Landings provides aprocess carrier for these techniques, so helping to unite all disciplines and allstakeholders and to extend the procurement process beyond handover.
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 16
14 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
As POE becomes more routine, findings and benchmarks from previous POEsurveys can be used to help calibrate client and design expectations. Wherepracticable, results from these surveys can also provide metrics that allow theseexpectations to be tracked from briefing, through design development,construction and commissioning, and into operation.
How do contractual duties change?Soft Landings extends the duties of the team before handover, in the weeksimmediately after handover, for the first year of occupation1, and for the secondand third years. In order to improve the chances of success, it reinforcesactivities during the earlier stages of briefing, design and construction. Theoverall objective is better buildings, with better performance which matchesmore closely the expectations of the client and the predictions of the designteam.
Soft Landings creates opportunities for greater interaction and understandingbetween the supply side of the industry and clients, building users and facilitiesmanagers. It helps everybody concerned to improve their processes andproducts, and to focus innovations on things that really make a difference.
Is there a standard scope of service?Soft Landings procedures are designed to augment standard professional scopesof service, not to replace them. They can be tailored to run alongside mostindustry standard procurement routes2 to create the most appropriate service tosuit the project concerned.
Major revisions to industry-standard documentation are not necessary. Themain additions to normal scopes of service occur during five main stages:
1 Inception and briefing to clarify the duties of members of the client, designand building teams during critical stages, and help set and manage expectationsfor performance in use.
2 Design development and review (including specification and construction).This proceeds much as usual, but with greater attention to applying theprocedures established in the briefing stage, reviewing the likely performanceagainst the original expectations and achieving specific outcomes.
3 Pre-handover, with greater involvement of designers, builders, operators andcommissioning and controls specialists, in order to strengthen the operationalreadiness of the building.
4 Initial aftercare during the users’ settling-in period, with a residentrepresentative or team on site to help pass on knowledge, respond to queries,and react to problems.
5 Aftercare in years 1 to 3 after handover, with periodic monitoring and reviewof building performance.
The following sections outline the content of the five stages in Soft Landings.Each section includes a checklist that summarises the specific activities in theparticular stage, with notes (in italics) on things to consider and pitfalls to avoid.
1 IN THE UK, THE DEFECTS LIABILITY PERIOD (DLP) USUALLY FINISHES ONE YEAR AFTER PRACTICAL COMPLETION ANDHANDOVER.2 FOR EXAMPLE (IN THE UK), THE JCT 2 STAGE CONTRACT FORM. IT CAN BE EMPLOYED ON A RANGE OF OTHERPROCUREMENT ROUTES FROM CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT THROUGH TO PRIVATE FINANCE INITIATIVE (PFI) ORPRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP (PPP).
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 17
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 15
Table 1: How Soft Landings aligns with the 2008 and 2013 editions of the RIBA Plan of Work and the workstages of BSRIA BG 6/2014 DesignFramework for Building Services. This workflow table has been revised to make it compatible with other Soft Landings publications. It alsoincludes reality-checking worksteps (shown in green) as outlined in BSRIA BG 27/2011 Pitstopping – BSRIA’s Reality-checking Process for SoftLandings. Additional guidance is freely available from www.softlandings.org.uk and www.usablebuildings.co.uk.
1 - Preparation and brief
2 - Concept design
3 - Developed design
4 - Technical design
5 - Construction
7 - In Use
0 - Strategic definition
2 - Concept design
3 - Developed design
7 - In use
2 - Concept
3a & 3b - Developed design
4a, 4b & 4c - Technical design
5 - Construction
6 - Handover
7 - In use
Scheme design reality check
A Appraisal
B Design brief
C Concept
D Design development
J Mobilisation
Post-practical completion
Production information
E Technical design
G Tender documentation
H Tender action
K Construction to practical completion
F1
F2
0 - Strategic definition
1 - Preparation and brief
4 - Technical design
L1
L2
L3
5 - Fabrication design
6 - Handover and close-out
1 - Preparation
RIBA 2008 Stages
RIBA 2013 Stages
CIC stages 2012 BSRIA BG 6/2014 Design Framework pro-formas
Stage 1. Briefing: identify all actions needed to support the procurement
Stage 2. Design development: to support the design as it evolves
Technical design reality-check(s)
Scheme design reality-check
Optional tender stage reality-check
Tender award stage reality-check
Pre-handover reality-check
Stage 4. Aftercare in the initial period: support in the first few weeks of ocupation
Stage 3. Pre-handover: Prepare for building readiness. Provide technical guidance
Stage5. Years 1 to 3 Aftercare: Monitoring review, fine-tuning and feedback
Define roles and responsibilities
Explain Soft Landings to all participants, identify processes and sign off gateways
Review past experience. Agree performance metrics. Agree design targets
Review design targets. Review usability and manageability
Review against design targets. Involve the future building managers
Include additional requirements related to Soft Landings procedures
Include evaluation of tender responses to Soft Landings requirements
Confirm roles and responsibilities of all parties in relation to Soft Landings requirements
6 - As constructed Include FM staff and/or contractors in reviews. Demonstrate control interfaces. Liase with move-in plans
Incorporate Soft Landings requirements
Set up home for resident on-site attendance
Operate review processes. Organise independent post-occupancy evaluations
Post-handover sign-off review. Ensure all outstanding reality-checked items are complete and system is signed off and operational
Soft Landings Soft Landingssupporting activities
0 - Strategic activities
Information exchanges will vary depending on the procurement route and building contract. Designers can create a bespoke Plan of Work for the client’s chosen procurement route in order to set out specific tendering and procurement activities for each stage.
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 18
16 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
Briefing is the most crucial stage of procurement. If it is not done well, it is alltoo easy to sow the seeds of future misunderstanding and discontent. A common problem is to put too much emphasis on the intended product, atthe expense of the general background, performance requirements (bothqualitative and quantitative), and the processes by which solutions should bedeveloped and tested. The more time that can made available for constructivedialogue, the greater the likelihood of success.
To obtain the greatest value from Soft Landings, the expectations andperformance targets that emerge from the briefing process should be arrived atwithin a well-structured, logical and recorded context. However, for variousreasons it may not always be possible to give the briefing stage all the time itdeserves at the outset. Consequently, Stage 1 of Soft Landings also establishestasks, responsibilities and review procedures that allow the brief to be re-examined in response to new findings, and to help ensure that critical issues arenot lost along the way.
Stage 1: Inception and briefing
Post-occupancy reviews often reveal major differences in performance between ostensibly similar buildings. Forexample, energy use can be higher by a factor of two or three, while self-assessed productivity scores from occupantsurveys can differ by 15-20 percentage points. In the best buildings, high levels of occupant satisfaction and goodenergy performance often go together. The unifying reason is usually that good committed people with good processesare able to achieve good all-round outcomes which enable multiple objectives to be met. By encouraging design briefmanagement Soft Landings will help to ensure that this happens.
An effective briefing process needs to seek clarity in three main areas:
● The context for the project: the client’s goals, the site and neighbourhood, environmental objectives, and widersocial, economic and environmental trends and how the building should adapt to them.
● The qualities of the solution: the client’s ends. Commonly included are space requirements and relationships,operational characteristics, indoor environment, mechanical, electrical and information services, costs, and image.Interest in building and environmental performance has been growing rapidly, but there still tend to be majordifferences between expectations and outcomes. Soft Landings helps teams to improve clarity of purpose, attention todetail, and include follow-through and feedback arrangements.
● The implications of the solution. The implications of the above become expressed in the emerging building design.However, what this really means in terms of performance is often less clearly examined, or examined under modellingassumptions rather than in relation to real life. How will people actually use it? How will it affect organisationaleffectiveness? Who will be needed to manage it? What if the building (or part of it) is no longer needed?
As a design develops, the emerging solutions should be tested against the brief, and vice-versa, as insights, opportunitiesand sometimes constraints emerge that may not have been envisaged when the brief was originally formulated. Thetests should include:
● A review of the assumptions. Has the context changed? Does physical representation of the requested qualities causethe client to have second thoughts? Have all the stakeholders been properly identified?
● Checks on the needs and demands of the proposed solution. Post-occupancy surveys reveal that buildings can easilybecome too complicated, sometimes in the name of labour-saving automation. If not carefully evaluated, this can makethings difficult for their users, expensive to operate and maintain, and demanding of management time. The quest forsimpler solutions can be rewarding.
● Tests of the design expectations. Designers are not users, though they often think they are, so designers can easilymake optimistic assumptions about user behaviour. If design intent is not clear to users, it can be difficult for thebuilding to perform as intended. A widespread problem is where user interfaces to manual and automated controls arepoorly considered, specified, located or signposted.
● Review of likely and actual outcomes. Soft Landings supports this, with regular reviews of client and designexpectations during procurement; and by monitoring, fine-tuning, post-occupancy evaluation and feedback once thebuilding is occupied.
NOTES ON BRIEFING AND DESIGN BRIEF MANAGEMENTby Adrian Leaman, Arup and Building Use Studies
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 19
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 17
B1. Define roles and responsibilitiesRoles and limits of responsibility must be spelt out clearly from the verybeginning. If nothing else, this will highlight any gaps. Sometimes the projectleader may also need to review how well certain individuals are suited to theirassumed roles. It is not enough to have the right job titles: individuals alsoneed the right mix of ability, experience and temperament.
To ensure that the design reflects operational needs, it is important to involvethe client’s facilities management team early on, ideally with the individualswho will take over the installed systems. If staff are not yet appointed (forexample. because the building will be sold on, or operations outsourced), thenindependent advice will often be desirable.
B2. Review past experiencePast experiences of team members and others will benefit the briefing, design,and construction process, and allow better and more realistic targets to be set.The project manager should seek to elicit all relevant experiences - good andbad - in a spirit of openness These will be hugely beneficial to the project.
B3. Plan for intermediate evaluations and reality checksThe programme should incorporate opportunities for intermediate evaluationworkshops. These will help to ensure that stakeholders are fully engaged as thedesign develops and that input from key users is obtained and not lost alongthe way. The workshops will help to flush out misconceptions on all sides.Topics will also come up which may seem incidental at the time but which canhelp to identify and sometimes to resolve decisions on things which mightotherwise be overlooked, or taken for granted.
B4. Set environmental and other performance targetsThe processes of target setting, prediction and measurement will highlight theneed for roles and expertise on the client side. Clients may not have anticipatedsome of the skills and activities required. Targets will normally have to satisfythe criteria of being unambiguous, measurable and of some value. Anindependent occupant questionnaire survey will normally be a standard part ofStage 5: Years 1 to 3 Aftercare. The results should be benchmarked against thedatabase of the survey providers, and published.
B5. Sign-off gateways Premature decision-taking can blunt innovation. However, there will be nochance of optimum success if one leaves too many loose ends for too long.Sign-off gateways create the structure for fixing decisions. Gateways are bothentry and exit points, but different criteria may be applied depending on entryand on exit, after which the requirements will be more binding on all parties.
B6. Incentives related to performance outcomesFor the environmental and other targets set in B4, the team needs to agreehow to measure performance in use, and what action is appropriate if anythingfalls short. A suitable action might be for the design and building team to agreeto follow-up any shortcomings and to suggest how performance might beimproved.
Clarity on the client side is absolutely essential,particularly in defining responsibilities, identifyingthe chain of command and agreeing the decision-making protocols. If any independent advisers areinvolved, it is important to clarify what authoritythey have, and that everyone in the project team isaware of it.
Teams should identify a Soft Landings Championwho has the responsibility to ensure that the SoftLandings process is developed to suit the project,and that it is followed through the entireprocurement process and on into the building’s use.Ideally the client’s champion should be mirrored onthe project team side. There may also be othernominated champions further down the contractualchain. The champions should also ensure that SoftLandings principles take their proper place as partof the routine management of the project and areproperly resourced. Champions need to be peoplewho have an interest in the in-use performance ofthe building, and who are likely to be on the teamfor the full duration of the project, for example theclient representative, the job architect, or theproject manager.
Communication between designers and facilitiesmanagers can be difficult owing to their often verydifferent perspectives. It is unlikely to happenautomatically, so the client's project managerneeds to make sure that it does. If not, seniorclients and designers may well have ideas that inpractice prove to be too complicated, or too difficultto look after. As unmanageable complexity is oftenthe prime cause of occupant dissatisfaction withthe indoor environment (and of excessive energyuse), it is vital to address complexity problems bydesigning for usability and manageability, eithersimplifying the solutions or increasing the levels offacilities management budget and skills.
Where quantified targets are not practicable, forexample owing to the difficulty of calculation, or alack of suitable metrics, qualitative indicators (forexample, on a scale of good practice – best practice– innovative – pioneering) can be useful guides inhelping to calibrate client aspirations, and to revisitthem during design reviews. A suitable actionmight be for the design and building team to agreeto follow-up any shortcomings and to suggest howperformance could be improved.
Some people would like to see financial incentives,such as a bonus to the design and building teamfor meeting certain performance levels. Penaltiesfor falling short are more contentious and could beexpensive and complicated to make legallybulletproof. A requirement to investigate and reportmay be preferable.
SUPPORTING NOTESSTAGE 1 CHECKLIST: INCEPTION AND BRIEFING
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 20
18 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
Once a project team has adopted Soft Landings at Stage 1: Inception andbriefing, then design development, technical design, production information andtendering will proceed much as usual. However, people will need to bring asomewhat different approach to the process. In particular:
● Everyone joining the client, design and construction teams will need to bemade aware that Soft Landings is in operation and commit to adopting itsprinciples.
● All team members will be encouraged to obtain and contribute insights fromthe performance-in-use of comparable projects.
● Client and design targets will be informed by actual performance in use,reviewed at intervals as the project progresses, and have any adjustments agreedand signed-off.
● Requirements for independent post-occupancy evaluation (POE) services willneed to be verified. To assist comparability and transparency, where appropriateand practical, the same metrics should be used for the design targets and whatthe POE will measure.
● The design process should include reality-checking workshops, includingreviews by experts in building performance.
● To accompany the design data, an illustrated narrative will be developed onhow the building will work from the point of view of the manager and theindividual user. This can evolve into the technical and user guides that will beissued to managers and occupiers at handover.
● Close attention needs to be given to the usability and manageability of theproposed design solutions, and in particular moving parts, electrical componentsand their control interfaces. Where the occupiers are known, their facilitiesmanagers and user representatives should be involved in reviewing theproposals and commenting not just on the design intent but also on the detailsof the management and user interfaces, including the equipment selected andits location.
● Suitable preparations must be made during design and construction to plan,programme and resource the critical periods in the weeks immediately beforeand after handover.
To make sure that all angles are covered, tender documentation may requireunfamiliar interventions by other design team members.
Stage 2: Design development and review
There are hundreds of these room controldevices in a business park development. Theyare not labelled and most of the occupants haveno idea what they do, except that presumablythey turn something up and down (the lights,the heat, the air?) and that there is an over-ridebutton that does something.
Poor user interfaces like this are commonplacein modern buildings, with adverse effects forcomfort, energy use and patience alike.
By undertaking reality-checks and addressinguser, management and maintenancerequirements, and following up issues that arisein use, Soft Landings aims to make this poordesign a thing of the past.
For more examples of controls usabilityproblems and ways to avoid them, downloadControls for End Users – a guide for good designand implementation free fromwww.bsria.co.uk/bookshop
Photo:David Bleicher/BSRIA
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 21
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 19
D1. Review past experienceIt is important to design for buildability, usability and manageability. From theearliest stages of a project designers and clients must think realistically aboutthe budget, the construction skills and resources needed to turn ideas into aphysical reality that suits the occupiers and doesn’t demand too much of them.
D2. Design reviews Review can be undertaken as part of normal design meetings. However, well-organised peer reviews (with independent experts at key stages in the design)can be effective in helping to pinpoint issues that may prove problematic. Theywill also help to identify solutions which may have been tried elsewhere.
Design reviews and the like should include a cross-section of people withdifferent jobs and levels of seniority. Otherwise, valuable perspectives onaspects of building usage and operation may emerge too late, and the designwill be compromised. For example, natural cooling strategies have too oftenbeen undermined when security staff insist on closing night ventilationopenings or insurance policies require it. The openings could have beendesigned differently had these concerns been identified earlier.
D3. Tender documentation and evaluationThe requirements related to Soft Landings procedures need to be incorporatedas part of conventional contract documentation.
The evaluation of submissions from the lead contractor, key sub-contractors andsuppliers must include an assessment of their understanding and acceptance ofthe Soft Landings procedures. Any shortfall must be rectified and thearrangements clarified prior to final acceptance and instruction to mobilise.
A detailed worksheet has now been developed for Stage 2 DesignDevelopment. Note that D3 Tender documentation and evaluation has becomeD6 in that worksheet.
At the simplest level this can be detailing forairtightness, making sure that lamps can bereached and changed, and that electricalconnections are provided for window actuators. At amore complex level, it might be digitalcommunications between separate environmentalsystems. In particular, interfaces to controls must bewell thought-through in relation to the technicalrequirements and their intelligibility tomanagement and a range of different users.
Designers must also consider the budgets andtechnical expertise the occupier is likely to be ableto devote to maintaining and repairing the building,controlling its technical systems and internalenvironment and resourcing its facilitiesmanagement services.
Design review meetings require sensitivepreparation and chairing if they are beconstructively critical. Timing is important: reviewsare best undertaken when options are relativelyclear, allowing discussion to be focused, but withsolutions not so well crystallised that the designteam finds it difficult to respond to importantcomments.
At these and other meetings, designers should notsell design themes and solutions too forcefully, asclients, managers and users may then be reluctantto offer their comments and to share theirexperiences of buildings in use. This may deny tothe project the benefit of the managementexperience and user insights that are often crucialto a building's ultimate performance.
Design reviews may benefit from beingindependently facilitated. A trained facilitator canunlock tacit knowledge that may otherwise notsurface. A good facilitator should also beexperienced in dealing with design team egos, andensure that even timid voices are heard.
Ensure that the requirements of Soft Landings arethoroughly written into the scope of the contract.
Go to Appendix A for the Stage 2 DesignDevelopment worksheet
SUPPORTING NOTESSTAGE 2 CHECKLIST: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 22
20 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
The main purpose of the pre-handover stage is to help to ensure that by thetime the building is handed over it is not just physically complete, but ready foroperation. A building readiness sub-programme therefore needs to be developedin good time, and well ahead of the start of commissioning work. Activities bythe design and building team must also include static commissioning (such asinspections of airtightness details, checks of window opening devices andlinkages, and envelope pressure tests). Commissioning of building services needsextending to include, for example, natural ventilation, renewable energysystems, metering installations and effective user interfaces. Great care needs tobe given to demonstration, training and documentation. Proposed activities bythe client and occupier also need to be reviewed, such as staffing, operation andmaintenance contracts, and move-in plans including fitouts where relevant.
It is essential that the client’s management team takes over the operation of thebuilding in a timely fashion. Problems that occur after handover can often betraced back to insufficient understanding by the occupier’s staff of technicalsystems (particularly building services) and their user interfaces, or wheresolutions have been developed without enough understanding of user andoperator requirements. Too often, buildings start their operational lives with toofew operating staff, who are not sufficiently trained, know little about thedesign intent, have had no opportunity to attend a demonstration, and areunfamiliar with the systems provided and how to use them.
To avoid problems, the project team should take more care in design andspecification and to pay more attention to the contractor’s proposals forcommissioning and handover. They will also need better understanding ofoperator skills and requirements and better arrangements for demonstratinginterfaces and systems properly to operating staff before handover. The timespent will lay the foundations for future co-operation.
Clients play a vital part in ensuring building readiness. If they leave staffing toolate (as they often do), problems with initial performance can be virtuallyguaranteed. However much the designer and constructor do to help, resolutionis nearly impossible if there are no good operators available on site.
A design and construction team is often told very little about how the occupierintends to move themselves into the building. As a result, occupiers can easilymake incorrect assumptions about how ready the building will be to receivethem, and what access and services will be available. This in turn can causeclashes and disappointments while the move is under way, and sour initial userexperiences of their new or altered building. With Soft Landings, designers andbuilders need to be involved with the occupier's logistics planning, if only to asmall extent.
Even in the best-managed projects, the commissioning period can get squeezed,owing to delays outside the control of the design and building team, and anoccupier’s business requirement for a non-negotiable handover date. SoftLandings will help to reduce the effects of any such slippages as the continuityit provides between the pre-handover and aftercare stages makes it much easierfor any outstanding commissioning activities to be continued after handover.
Stage 3: Pre-handover
Shell, core and fit-outIn some buildings, particularly rented ones,spaces are handed over in an unfinished state,to be fitted-out by others, or for specialistpurposes.
It is vital that design intent is made clear tofitout team, with rules on what to do andwhat to avoid. It is also important for theoriginal design team to review fitout proposalsthoroughly, but with a quick turnaround astenants will be in a hurry. Otherwise, majorproblems can easily arise, particularly affectingcontrol systems and HVAC services, especiallyfor more innovative designs which may havecharacteristics unfamiliar to the fitout team.
Rented buildingsIn speculative buildings (apart from pre-lets),it is more difficult to maintain the continuitythat is the hallmark of Soft Landings owing toa lack of information on the occupier and thedelays that can occur between the physicalcompletion of the building and the arrival ofthe first tenant. Reviewing fitouts by incomingtenants does not form part of core SoftLandings activities. However, clients for suchprojects should consider appointing theoriginal design team to do reviews of thiskind.
Applying Soft Landings todifferent property models
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 23
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 21
P1. Environmental and energy logging reviewResponsibilities and routines for data recording must be agreed and related tothe targets that are established. These roles and responsibilities need to becoordinated with the building's logbook and its metering strategy.
P2. Building readiness programmeThis building readiness programme needs to be prepared well in advance ofmove-in. Site completion and commissioning activities need to be coordinated,training activities written, and other records finalised. This should include thesetting-up of energy meters, their recording accuracy, their reconciliation withfiscal meters, and the verification of data recorded by any energy monitoringsoftware.
P3. Commissioning records checkCommissioning records should include energy data where available (such astrue power consumed by fan motors, not just current readings). There shouldalso be a programme for post-completion commissioning and fine-tuning.
P4. Maintenance contractEnsure that the contract is appropriate and that the service is in placeimmediately after handover.
P5. TrainingAdequately trained operation and maintenance staff must be in place beforehandover. They will need proper familiarisation and training about the buildingand its systems in good time – not at the last minute.
P6. Building management system interface completion anddemonstrationA demonstration to the building operators of the building management system(BMS) and any allied controls helps to ensure that the systems are familiar,operating appropriately, and that staff have some understanding of how to useand fine-tune them. These actions will identify any need for additional work.
P7. Migration planningThe occupier's move-in programme needs to be coordinated with the designand building team. A small involvement of the design and building team in theoccupier's logistics planning can help minimise the upsets that can easily ariseif moving-in operations clash with site activities, for example if an access isobstructed, a lift is not available, rooms or services are being finished off, orscreeds are hardening and are therefore initially unable to support heavy loads.
P8. Aftercare team homeThe occupier must provide a visible and accessible workplace in the newbuilding for the aftercare team from day one. The size and complexity of theproject will determine whether the presence is permanent or at specified hours,and whether by one or more people.
P9. Compile a guide for occupantsA simple guide for occupants will help them understand the design intent anduse the building effectively. It will complement the required O&M manuals andlogbook, within which a copy of the user guide should be filed.
P10 Compile a technical guideThe technical guide should provide a succinct introduction for the facilitiesmanagement team to help to smooth the transition to local operation. Ideally, itwill have been developed in the course of design and construction, so that atany stage in the project people can find a clear description of how the systemsin the building are supposed to work.
P11. O&M manual reviewThe team should review the content of the O&M manual with the facilitiesmanager, who should sign it off when it is complete and acceptable.
Written material must also be available in time, butshould be organised to make revisions easy in thelight of initial experience and fine-tuning.
Operating staff will be happier to take ownership ofthe installation when they are comfortable with thedesign concepts, understand their roles, and havecommented on interface development.
Soft Landings representatives must makethemselves visible to the occupants of the building.Staying off-site or hiding in the contractor's hut willdefeat the objective.
The guide should be completed in good time, withinput from facilities management staff and userrepresentatives if possible. It may well needrevisions after operational experience is gained. Itwill save time by reducing the number of questionswhen the building is first occupied, and thecomplaints that arise from misunderstanding ormisuse.
Guidance for occupiers and managers need revisingafter in-use operational experience has beengained.
SUPPORTING NOTESSTAGE 3 CHECKLIST: PRE-HANDOVER
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 24
22 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
The service during the initial aftercare period is intended to help the occupiersto understand their building, and the facilities managers to operate its systems.The aftercare team is there to provide information and support, to respond toany questions that arise and to investigate any problems that emerge. It isimportant that the building’s facilities or management team is properlyresourced, so they have the skills and time to take advantage or this service.Soft Landings will not work properly if the occupiers think they can sit backand leave things to the aftercare team.
During the initial aftercare period, one or more members of the design andbuilding team will be present on site for typically four to six weeksimmediately after move-in. After this initial period, the residential presence ofdesign and construction team members will taper off, but periodic reviews willcontinue, as outlined in Section 5.
The size and complexity of the project and the occupants’ move-in timetablewill determine how much time will be required, over what period, and for howmany people. It could be as little as one day per week, but much will dependon what actually happens once the occupier moves in.
One of the team should act as the main point of contact for overall liaison.This will usually be the architect, but that depends on the project. Buildingservices and commissioning engineers always need to be closely involved andreadily available, because many initial queries are often related to the use andperformance of unfamiliar mechanical, electrical and control systems andenvironmental control strategies.
The aftercare team must be visible, with a workplace in a readily-accessiblelocation and not hidden away. Team members must work not just with thefacilities management team, but be accessible to everyone. Occupants musttherefore be told that the aftercare team is operating, what it will be doing,where it will be, and when. The times of residence need to be regular (such asevery morning, or every Tuesday) so everybody knows what to expect.
Team members must make themselves available to deal pre-emptively withqueries and misunderstandings. The observations they make, the questions theyanswer, the responses they get and the insights they derive will help preventminor problems developing into longer term chronic irritants for the occupantsand the client alike. Their period of residence also provides an opportunity toobserve and learn from initial feedback and problem-solving.
Visibility also includes sessions at which the aftercare team describes thebuilding and its systems to groups of occupants as soon as possible after theymove in, and introduces them to the guide for occupants (see box). Theaftercare team will also provide news on issues, problems and progress,normally via the occupier’s intranet.
Aftercare is not an administrative exercise nor should it be a superficial attemptat marketing. Instead it should be a proper professional service. Where it isdone effectively it will generate a lot of goodwill. Being seen to be on the sideof the users helps a lot – and ensures a meaningful invitation to the officialopening.
A guide for building occupants is a practicalmethod of informing individuals about abuilding’s systems and procedures.
There are no strict rules on content or style,but ideally the guidance must be written forlay users, should avoid using technical jargon,be illustrated to assist comprehension, and beavailable in both electronic and printed form.
The content should include information ongeneral features of the building such assecurity, safety and access, and environmentalfeatures (including energy and water efficiencyand waste management). It should also coverprinciples of design and operation, particularlywhere the environmental systems rely partiallyor wholly on local controls for heating,lighting, cooling, and ventilation.
Other issues that may be important to coverinclude furniture, space use and cycle storage,and where to go for help and moreinformation.
Tips for an occupants’ guide
Stage 4: Initial aftercare
The building’s technical guide explains to theowners and operators (not the individualusers) how the building and its systems work,and the performance that is expected. Thisguide is not the same as an O&M manual,which contains far more detail.
As well as meeting any statutoryrequirements, the technical guide shouldincorporate the mandatory Logbook onBuilding Services and the strategy for energymetering in accordance with prevailingtechnical guidance from BSRIA and the CIBSE.Where applicable, it should also fulfil therequirements of the environmental ratingscheme used, such as LEED, BREEAM, or Ska(for refurbishments).
Even though it may be technical in nature, theguidance should be written in plain English.
Tips for a technical guide
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 25
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 23
The aftercare checklist covers the initial period of occupation, typically four tosix weeks after handover.
A1. Resident on-site attendanceConfirm who will be there, where and when.
A2. Provide workplace and datacomms linksThe occupier must provide an appropriate and well-located workstation for theaftercare team.
A3. Introductory guidance for building usersThe occupier’s representative should organise informal user meetings as soonas possible after the building has been occupied. The size of the meetings andwho exactly should go will depend on the size of the project and the nature ofthe occupying organisation. The prime purpose is for the aftercare team toexplain why they are there, to present key information on how the buildingoperates, introduce the guide for occupants, and answer questions. Anticipatethe need to hold at least two meetings.
A4. Technical guidanceThe purpose is to smooth the transition of responsibility from the project teamto the client's facilities management team. It should help them gain a goodunderstanding of the building, and be able to take full authority over operatingand fine-tuning its systems. The ground will have been prepared in the pre-handover stage, but further support may often be necessary in the light ofissues that emerge over the first weeks of operation, and to accommodate newpeople arriving as part of the move.
A5. CommunicationsIt is important that users are kept informed of progress on operational issues;for example via regular newsletters or other bulletins.
A6. WalkaboutsMembers of the Soft Landings aftercare team (preferably those most familiarwith the design intention and the controls systems) should roam the buildinginformally on a regular basis to examine the building in use, observeoccupation and spot emerging issues. Walkabouts can be combined with othervisits as appropriate. They should make spot-checks with instruments ifnecessary: these also provide opportunities to discuss with individuals theirexperience of the building, its systems and the indoor environment.
Aftercare team members should have good peopleskills, a hands-on approach to problem solving, andcontinuity with the project. The leader will often bean architect, with essential regular support from theteam, in particular the building services contractorand commissioning team, and the mechanical andelectrical designers.
In addition to responding to day-to-day comments,allow for two dedicated meetings with facilitiesmanagement representatives to explain systemsand discuss their views.
Keep communications simple, not too technical andeasy to update. The occupier's intranet, a websiteor a similar service can also be effective and time-efficient. Fortnightly updates will usually suffice.
SUPPORTING NOTESSTAGE 4 CHECKLIST: AFTERCARE
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 26
24 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
Once the initial aftercare period is over, the Soft Landings service moves fromregular visits to periodic reviews. The aftercare team is there to provideinsights, review performance, and help the users and operators to get the bestout their building, not to run it on their behalf. Responsibility for operationand provision and initial review of routine information (such as BMS logs andmeter readings) must lie firmly with the building’s facilities management team.
In Year 1, the primary focus should be on settling everything down, makingsure that the design intent is well understood, identifying any problems, andlogging usage and change. There may well also be a need to fine-tune systems,particularly lighting controls and hvac systems, in order to optimise effectiveand energy-efficient operation and to take account of occupant feedback andchanges in weather and occupancy.
In Years 2 and 3 the reviews become less frequent, concentrating on recordingthe operation of the building and reviewing performance. By then the facilitiesmanagement team should be fully in command of the building’s systems, bedealing with all problems (usually without reference to the design and buildingteam). They should also be collecting and reviewing their own data, andrefining their operational strategies. The Soft Landings process will have helpedthem to overcome any initial difficulties.
The aftercare period will also include a number of (preferably independentlyconducted) post-occupancy surveys. The type, coverage, method and timing ofthese surveys will depend on what has been agreed for each project. Where thedesign and building team has committed to undertaking an occupant survey orsurveys, and following-up on any problem areas, the brief should includesuggested survey timings. In general terms:
● The timing of the first occupant survey depends on the project. It is best towait until occupants have experienced one full heating and cooling season.Phased handover, phased occupation, or additional fit-out works may alsojustify a delay beyond 12 months. The Soft Landings team need to judgecarefully the point at which survey results are likely to reflect the building’ssteady pattern of operation. Performing the first survey too soon may mean theresults have too many caveats to be of much value.
● Occupant focus groups held in the initial aftercare period can providevaluable initial reactions and help to target early action. However, these canalso be held prematurely, particularly if initial teething problems are still freshin the memory. Focus groups can also be dominated by a vocal minority whoset the agenda on behalf of the others who may be more meek. Focus groupstherefore need to be properly facilitated and the results used with caution.Combining focus groups with occupant questionnaires can lead to survey fatigue.
● Year 3 is the best time for a second survey to summarise the occupants’views on the long term performance of the building. It allows enough time forthe building and its systems to have settled down, for fine-tuning in year 2 tohave had an effect, and for any initial problems to be long past.
Everybody involved in the extended aftercare service will gain valuableinformation and insights. This feedback will help the building to work betterand the client and occupiers to get the best out of the design. The feedbackalso provides valuable intelligence that all those involved will take back to theirwork, their organisations and the industry. This in turn will help to improve thegoods and services they and the industry provide and make sure that theirfuture efforts are targeted more accurately on the things which will really makea difference.
Stage 5: Years 1-3 Extended aftercare and POE
The aftercare service in Years 1 to 3 assumesthat the building continues to be used ingeneral accordance with its design intent. Itdoes not anticipate major alterations inoccupancy or space planning. However,sometimes the owner or occupier may need tomake significant physical changes to all or partof building, or to its use.
In the past, owners and occupiers have oftenembarked on such changes withoutappreciating the adaptability potential that thedesigner may have provided and theconstraints that may also exist. The SoftLandings team's knowledge of both the designpotential and its performance-in-use will helpto inform the occupier's decision-makingprocesses, and may allow before-and-aftercomparisons to be made.
A readily available, up-to-date, evidence basewill improve insights and outcomes andsustain a positive relationship with the designand building team.
Alterations to the building
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 27
The activities below are repeated each year, though at a reducing frequency(see Appendix A).
Y1. Aftercare review meetingsOnce the initial period of intensive aftercare is over, regular meetings shouldcontinue in order to review progress with the user representatives and facilitiesmanagement. The frequency of meetings will depend on the project. Intervalsof 3-4 months may be appropriate in Year 1, decreasing to six months in Years2 and 3.
Y2. Logging environmental and/or energy performanceThe facilities manager must take the lead in monitoring energy consumptionand usage. Logging provides the basis for comparison with the energy plan andwill assist fine-tuning of the systems. The frequency will depend on the extentof sub-metering and the provision of any energy data-gathering, monitoringand analysis software running on the building management system.
Y3. Systems and energy reviewA written review of overall energy and systems performance is desirable. Six-month intervals will normally be adequate, though some can be done remotelyand much of the rest combined with activities Y1 and Y4.
Y4. Fine tune systemsSeasonal changes and any particular issues emerging (for example fromenvironmental and energy monitoring and occupant comments) will dictatewhen this needs doing and whether it needs repeating. The facilitiesmanagement team and commissioning engineers may need to be involved aswell as the building services contractor.
Y5. Record fine-tuning and usage changeDependable comparison of actual and forecast performance will be impossibleunless the facilities manager records changes routinely. The O&M manuals andbuilding logbook will also need updating to reflect alterations to systems andequipment and any changes to standard control settings and operating schedules.
Y6. CommunicationsUpdates to newsletters and websites will be less frequent, and may ceasebefore the end of Year 3 if felt appropriate.
Y7. WalkaboutsAs in the first weeks of occupation, when on-site members of the design andbuilding team must not just do technical things and attend meetings. Theymust also take the opportunity to walk around the building, make observationsand where possible discuss performance with occupiers, management andmaintenance staff. This provides opportunities for spotting actual or emergentchanges which may go unrecorded, and may otherwise compromiseperformance or not make the most of the latent potential in the design.
Y8. Measure environmental, energy and human factors performance A key part of the annual end of year review is to compare recordedperformance with the design targets. The performance metrics can be a mix ofscientific data, statistical data, and anecdotal feedback. The most informativeperformance feedback may come from occupant stories rather than hard data.Independently-curated occupant surveys (held not less than 12 months apart)help to put energy consumption and other scientific data into a human andoperational context.
Y9. End of year reviewAn annual meeting is required to review the general and environmentalperformance of the building. This also allows all parties (client, design andbuilding team, users and facilities managers) to maintain a positive relationshipand decide any change in focus for the next year. The final review at the end ofYear 3 provides a well-structured wrap-up of lessons learned, and anopportunity to celebrate success and prospects for future collaboration.
Several key actions can be combined on one visit.
Monthly reviews of energy performance would be aminimum, but much more frequent checks willoften be rewarding. For example, logs of half-hourly electrical consumption can indicate whetherequipment is coming on too early; or being left onunnecessarily overnight, at weekends, or overholiday periods. A change in energy use patternscan also give early warning of equipment failure orunderperformance and permit rapid correctiveaction. Such logging can also help to determine theeffects of operating systems differently.The designers may be able to log consumptiondirectly via the BMS but this must not replace thefacilities management monitoring responsibility forroutine monitoring and review.
In order to make meaningful comparisons betweenforecast and actual energy use, it will be essentialto understand how control and operation differsfrom the assumptions made at the design stage.
Combine walkabouts with other visits asappropriate. Every three months is a good baseline.See and be seen.
This activity can be combined closely with Y3above.
The review at the end of Year 1 can be coordinatedwith the defects liability period sign-off, and canalso allow any performance targets for future yearsto be re-visited in the light of experience.
SUPPORTING NOTESSTAGE 5 CHECKLIST: YEARS 1-3 EXTENDED AFTERCARE
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 25
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 28
26 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
These generic worksheets were developed as part of the original Soft Landingsresearch, and have formed part of the background to writing this Frameworkdocument.
The worksheets now cover all five stages of the Soft Landings process. Aworksheet for Stage 2: Design, not available for the first edition of the SoftLandings Framework, was written for BG 45/2014 How to Procure Soft Landings. Itis therefore now included within this edition of the Soft Landings Framework.
For each activity outlined in the Framework, clients, project managers and designand building teams can use the worksheets to help them identify the actionsrequired, who should initiate them and who needs to participate. Theparticipants can then agree how they propose to carry them out, and assignresponsibilities for doing so. The worksheets include notes to assistimplementation.
Teams may wish to use a similar format to assist their project management, byrecording what they have decided to do, who is responsible, the actions agreed,and the programme for undertaking them. They can also identify techniques tobe used, who may need to be brought in for specialist support or advice, whenand how post-occupancy surveys should be carried out, and so on.
Do not attempt to use the generic worksheets exactly as written. You will needto think how the concepts should be applied to suit the requirements of yourparticular project, for example different forms of procurement and contract. Theinitiator of certain tasks may also differ from project to project, as may theparticipants. For example, if the team includes specialist advisors on, say,acoustics or information technology, they might be selected to lead (orotherwise participate) in certain activities.
Go to www.softlandings.org.uk for up-to-date downloads of worksheets inExcel and PDF, together with advice, support and guidance on Soft Landingstechniques and applications. The Usable Buildings Trust websitewww.usablebuildings.co.uk also contains useful supporting material.
BSRIA runs a Soft Landings User Group whose members are developing andsharing best practice. For more information go towww.bsria.co.uk/information-membership/events/networks/soft-landings/
Appendix A: Example worksheets
soft landings framework2014 RB 1_soft landings framework 2014 Edition 21/03/2014 09:26 Page 29
Stag
e 1
wor
kshe
et exa
mple: In
cept
ion
and
briefin
g
Stag
e
Action
Purp
ose
Initiato
rPa
rticipan
ts
Scop
e of
dut
ies
Not
es
B1
Def
ine
roles an
dRe
spon
sibilities
Team
s sh
ould
iden
tify
aSo
ft L
andi
ngs
Cham
pion
for
the
full
dura
tion
of
the
proj
ect
To rev
iew in
dividu
al roles
,high
light
any
gap
s an
d clarify
the
scop
e of
individu
al's
resp
onsibilities
Client
Des
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
The
Soft
Lan
ding
s ch
ampi
onca
n ei
ther
att
end
all
mee
ting
s, o
r no
min
ate
rapp
orte
urs
for
all S
oft
Land
ings
sta
ges
Client
: Issue
a list tha
t states
clea
rly the
roles
and
sco
pe of
resp
onsibilities
Roles an
d lim
its of re
spon
sibility m
ust be
clear fro
m the
start. If no
thing
else
, this will
high
light
any
gap
s an
d, p
ossibly, the
uns
uitability of
individu
als in the
ir as
sum
ed roles
.Title
s are
less im
portan
t th
an an
individu
al’s ability an
d te
mpe
ram
ent. W
hile the
foc
us is
ofte
n on
the
sup
ply-
side
(th
e de
sign
tea
m and
con
stru
ctor
s), it is e
qually im
portan
t th
atth
e ro
les an
d re
spon
sibilities in the
dem
and-
side
clie
nt tea
m are
equ
ally w
ell d
efined
. The
team
sho
uld
invo
lve
the
projec
t sp
onso
r, So
ft Lan
ding
s Ch
ampion
, building
user
sre
pres
entativ
e, fac
ilitie
s m
anag
er, c
lient
adv
isor
s, and
the
pro
ject m
anag
er.
B2
Review
pas
t ex
perie
nce
To id
entif
y pa
st exp
erienc
e(g
ood
and
bad)
which
may
bene
fit the
des
ign
and
cons
truc
tion
and
the
soft
land
ing
proc
ess
Client
and
des
ign
team
Des
ign
team
Client
Cons
truc
tor
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilities m
anag
er
Agr
ee w
hich
issu
es n
eed
tobe
tak
en in
to accou
ntInclud
e feed
back
for
rea
lity ch
ecking
, qua
lity as
suranc
e an
d aw
aren
ess of
con
straints, p
ast
expe
rienc
e an
d pa
st p
erform
ance
. Wha
t ha
s wor
ked
before
in sim
ilar situ
ations
? Th
irdpa
rty invo
lvem
ent m
ay b
e he
lpfu
l in
unea
rthing
this inform
ation.
B3
Inte
rmed
iate
eva
luation
prog
ram
me
To e
nsur
e stak
eholde
rs are
enga
ged
in the
pro
cess and
that in
put from
key
use
rs is
not lost along
the
way
Des
ign
team
Des
ign
team
Client
Cons
truc
tor
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilities m
anag
er
Includ
e ev
alua
tion
and
decision
point
s in d
esign
prog
ram
me
Inte
rmed
iate
eva
luation
wor
ksho
ps d
uring
the
early
des
ign
stag
es are
ver
y ef
fective
influ
shing
out m
isco
ncep
tions
on
all s
ides
. The
y en
sure
stake
holder
s are
fully
eng
aged
inth
e pr
oces
s an
d th
at in
put from
key
use
rs is
obt
aine
d an
d is n
ot lo
st along
the
way
. In
particular the
wor
ksho
ps w
ill h
elp
to in
crem
entally
fix d
ecisions
on
the
man
y sm
aller (b
utstill im
portan
t) is
sues
dur
ing
this stage
.
B4
Set en
viro
nmen
tal
perfor
man
ce targe
tsEn
sure
s th
at the
actua
lpe
rfor
man
ce of ke
y issu
es is
realised
Client
and
the
design
tea
mCo
nstruc
tor
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilities m
anag
er
Agr
ee sub
jects, targe
t(s) and
appr
opria
te m
easu
rem
ent
met
hods
All targ
ets sh
ould b
e un
ambigu
ous, m
easu
rable
and
of som
e va
lue.
The
setting
of e
nviro
nmen
tal a
nd e
nerg
y targ
ets (w
heth
er w
ith som
e fin
ancial in
cent
ive
or n
ot) raises
a n
umbe
r of
issu
es tha
t ne
ed con
side
ratio
n:● The
des
ign
solutio
n m
ust be
with
in the
ability of
the
use
rs to
cont
rol it
●Th
ere
will b
e a gr
eate
r de
pend
ency
on
a go
od B
EMS, effec
tively us
ed
● Com
mon
sen
se m
ust be
app
lied
to ave
raging
out
exp
ectatio
ns.
Idea
lly, t
he p
roce
sses
of targ
et set
ting, p
rediction
and
mea
sure
men
t sh
ould b
e ab
le to
iden
tify th
e ro
les of
clie
nt req
uire
men
ts, d
esign
solutio
ns and
use
r an
d m
anag
emen
tbe
haviou
r in ach
ieving
the
des
ired
outcom
es.
The
leve
l of ex
pertise
with
in the
clie
nt b
ody to
maint
ain
and
cont
rol t
he in
tern
alen
viro
nmen
t ne
eds clarifica
tion
at the
start of th
e ea
rly d
esign
stag
e, so
that d
esign
for
man
agab
ility can
be
realistic
ally u
nder
take
n. The
individu
als who
will tak
e ov
er the
installed
system
s m
ust be
invo
lved
.
B5
Sign
-off g
atew
ays,
includ
ing
reality
che
cks
Crea
tes th
e stru
ctur
e for fix
ing
decision
sClient
and
use
rre
pres
entativ
eClient
User
rep
rese
ntative
Des
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Inde
pend
ent review
er(s)
Agr
ee d
ecision
mak
ers an
dcrite
ria for
sign-
offs
Sign
-off g
atew
ays crea
te the
struc
ture
for
fixing
decision
s. The
following
ques
tions
sho
uld
be add
ressed
at ea
ch g
atew
ay: Is th
e strate
gic br
ief be
ing
met
? Are
inte
rmed
iate
evalua
tion
decision
s inco
rpor
ated
? Hav
e ris
ks b
een
asse
ssed
and
are
the
y ac
cept
able? Is it
still w
hat is w
ante
d? A
re targe
ts like
ly to
be m
et? Are
we
read
y to
mov
e on
to
the
next
stag
e?
B6
Ince
ntives
includ
ing
inde
pend
ent oc
cupa
ntsu
rvey
s
Ince
ntivises
bot
h th
e de
man
dan
d su
pply sides
of team
Client
Des
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Dec
ide
form
of ince
ntive.
Agr
ee targe
ts and
def
ine
mea
sure
men
t crite
ria
An
inde
pend
ent oc
cupa
nt sur
vey pr
ovider
sho
uld
be app
oint
ed early, b
ased
on
a pr
oven
,ro
bust sur
vey m
etho
dology
, and
the
ability to
ben
chm
ark th
e re
sults
aga
inst a relev
ant
datase
t.
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 27
soft
land
ings
tabl
es 2
7021
4_so
ft la
ndin
gs ta
bles
240
214.
qxd
04/
03/2
014
11:
37 P
age
1
Stag
e
Action
Purp
ose
Initiato
rPa
rticipan
ts
Scop
e of
dut
ies
Not
es
D1
Cont
inue
building
revisits for
spe
cific
design
opt
ions
, and
use
the
finding
s to
inform
design
dec
isions
To ref
ine
the
design
in the
light
of inform
ation
from
feed
back
of ot
her re
leva
ntpr
ojec
ts and
/or pr
oper
ties
owne
d by
the
clie
nt
Client
Client
Des
ign
team
Fa
cilities/
prem
ises
man
ager
sMaint
enan
ce p
erso
nnel
Cons
truc
tor (w
here
app
oint
ed)
End-
user
rep
rese
ntative(
s)
Build
ing
revisits, t
alks
betw
een
prop
erty m
anag
ers
and
maint
aine
rs and
the
design
tea
m. C
heck
lists
crea
ted
of b
oth
well-
func
tioning
and
dys
func
tiona
lsy
stem
s, and
occup
ant
expe
rienc
es. T
ie-in
finding
swith
pro
ject rea
lity-
chec
king
proc
edur
es
Build
ing
revisits can
gen
erate
chec
klists of te
chnica
l and
non
-tec
hnical w
atch
point
s.Th
ech
ecklists can
be
used
to
refin
e th
e client
req
uire
men
ts, t
o inform
the
des
ign
brief, an
d to
prov
ide
insigh
ts for
rea
lity-
chec
king
mee
tings
thr
ough
out th
e co
nstruc
tion
proc
ess.
It is vita
l to
enga
ge w
ith fac
ilitie
s an
d m
aint
enan
ce p
eople. The
y ca
n be
ver
y insigh
tful abo
utco
nstruc
tion
details
, ite
ms of
plant
, com
mission
ing, and
end
-use
r ex
perie
nces
. Som
e ef
fort
may
be
requ
ired
to p
ersu
ade
them
to
take
part in d
iscu
ssions
as th
ey m
ay n
ot b
e us
ed to
it.
Issu
es sho
uld
be rec
orde
d in suc
h an
way
tha
t th
e feed
back
doe
sn't
get forg
otte
n as
the
design
dev
elop
s. A
n op
erationa
l risk re
gister
may
be
a us
eful w
orking
doc
umen
t, p
artic
ularly
for th
ose
joining
the
projec
t late
r.
D2
Review
des
ign
for
build
ability,
com
mssiona
bility an
dm
aint
aina
bility
To e
nsur
e th
at the
des
ign
conc
epts can
be
built
,co
mm
ission
ed and
ope
rate
dsu
cces
sfully
Cons
truc
tor
Client
Co
nstruc
tor
Des
ign
team
Pr
ojec
t m
anag
er
Key su
b-co
ntractor
s (o
r pr
oxies)
Cost con
sulta
nt
Facilities m
anag
erCo
mm
ission
ing
man
ager
Maint
enan
ce p
erso
nnel
End-
user
rep
rese
ntative(
s)
Iden
tify ke
y su
b-co
ntractor
s to
atte
nd p
re-con
trac
t, o
r fin
dpr
oxies. Tie-in
outp
uts with
projec
t reality
-che
cking
proc
edur
es
The
review
pro
cess m
ay b
e a sing
le m
eetin
g or
a ser
ies of
mee
tings
. If tim
e an
d bu
dget
only
allows for on
e review
mee
ting, it
s tim
ing
will b
e cruc
ial. It
will b
e of
little value
if the
mee
ting
occu
rs b
efor
e th
e m
ain
cont
ractor, M
&E co
ntractor
and
com
mission
ing
man
ager
hav
ebe
en app
oint
ed.
Deliber
ations
and
dec
isions
sho
uld
be related
to
the
cost p
lan, and
any
cos
t im
plications
discus
sed
with
the
clie
nt and
cos
t co
nsultant
. The
in-u
se p
erform
ance
implications
sho
uld
bem
ade
clea
r, ag
reed
by all, ap
prov
ed by th
e client
, and
rec
orde
d in the
pro
ject d
ocum
entatio
n.
D3
Review
des
ign
for
usab
ility and
man
agea
bliity
To rev
iew the
des
ign
from
the
perspe
ctive
of tho
se w
ho w
illco
ntro
l and
man
age
the
build
ing
afte
r ha
ndov
er, a
nd to
iden
tify ho
w the
enviro
nmen
tal c
ontrol n
eeds
of
end-
user
s will b
e m
et
Lead
des
igne
ror
con
stru
ctor
Client
Co
nstruc
tor
Des
ign
team
Pr
ojec
t m
anag
er
Facilities/
prem
ises
man
ager
sMaint
enan
ce p
erso
nnel
Cont
rols spe
cialist (o
r pr
oxy)
Cmm
ission
ing
man
ager
M&E co
ntractor
Iden
tify ga
ps in
kno
wledg
ean
d sp
ot spe
cific
risks
for
build
ing
man
agem
ent an
den
d-us
ers. D
eter
mine
the
end-
user
con
trol sys
tem
s.
Tie-
in findinq
s with
rea
lity-
chec
king
(se
e D4)
The
review
pro
cess m
ay b
e a sing
le m
eetin
g or
a ser
ies of
mee
tings
. A w
orks
hop
can
still b
eus
eful eve
n whe
re tim
e an
d bu
dget
res
trictio
ns o
nly allow for
one
rev
iew m
eetin
g, b
utex
pectations
will n
eed
to b
e realistic
.
Cont
rols u
sually p
lay a sign
ifica
nt role
in u
sability an
d m
anag
eability. W
here
the
con
trols
com
pany
has
not
bee
n ap
pointe
d, effor
ts sho
uld
be m
ade
to find
a pr
oxy. M
any co
ntro
lsco
mpa
nies
will b
e jum
p at the
cha
nce
to g
ive
pre-
cont
ract adv
ice.
D4
Unde
rtak
e th
e reality
-ch
ecking
pro
cess started
in the
Brie
fing
stag
ewor
kshe
et and
impo
rtth
e ou
tcom
es fro
m B
1,B2
and
B3.
Chos
e a reality
-che
cking
proc
ess an
d reality
-che
ckse
lected
elem
ents (se
e no
tes)
Projec
tm
anag
erClient
Pr
ojec
t m
anag
erDes
ign
team
Se
lected
sub
-con
trac
tors o
rpr
oxies
End-
user
rep
rese
ntative(
s)
Dut
ies in line
with
the
BSR
IApr
oces
s BG
27/
2011
Pitsto
pping. Create
RASC
I*ch
arts, o
r sim
liar
BSRIA B
G 2
7/20
11 P
itsto
pping
describ
es a p
roce
ss for
rea
lity-
chec
king
, the
pro
cess w
here
byth
e pr
ojec
t team
gives
spe
cific
elem
ents close
r atte
ntion
durin
g de
sign
, con
stru
ction
and
installatio
n. O
utpu
ts fro
m rea
lity-
chec
king
sho
uld
inform
the
activities
for
the
pre
-han
dove
r,ha
ndov
er and
after
care
stage
s.
It is im
portan
t to
create
the
right
con
ditio
ns for
rea
lity-
chec
king
. The
req
uire
d ho
nesty,
open
ness, a
nd crit
ical ana
lysis by
atten
dees
won
't co
me
easy. P
eople
will b
uy in
to it
if the
first m
eetin
g is a suc
cess.
D5
Revisit an
d up
date
early
perfor
man
ce targe
tsTo
ens
ure
that targe
ts rem
ain
realistic
and
app
ropr
iate
Lead
des
igne
ror
con
stru
ctor
Client
Pr
ojec
t m
anag
er
Cons
truc
tor
M&E co
ntractor
Des
ign
team
Fa
cilities m
anag
er
BREE
AM/S
ka adv
iser
(op
tiona
l)
Iden
tify an
d de
scrib
e th
epe
rfor
man
ce targe
ts, s
uch
asen
ergy
, env
ironm
ental, so
cial
and
othe
r pe
rfor
man
ce targe
ts(suc
h as
water
and
em
bodied
ener
gy). R
eview, a
ndco
mm
unicate
to all re
leva
ntpa
rties
By the
ir na
ture, e
arly e
nerg
y targ
ets ge
nerate
d for plan
ning
com
plianc
e are
sim
plistic
and
do
not re
quire
des
igne
rs to
brea
k do
wn
ener
gy con
sum
ption
by e
nd-u
se. S
oft La
ndings
req
uire
sth
e pr
ojec
t team
to
deve
lop
mor
e de
taile
d m
odels of
the
building's en
ergy
and
env
ironm
ental
perfor
man
ce, inc
luding
unr
egulated
(plug
-in)
pow
er lo
ads an
d ho
urs of
ope
ratio
n. Early
mod
ellin
g will u
se n
otiona
l value
s, b
ut the
se can
be
prog
ressively re
fined
dur
ing
late
r So
ftLa
ndings
stage
s. The
tea
m sho
uld
use
tools th
at can
be
unde
rsto
od by facilities m
anag
ers
(suc
h as
Exc
el cha
rts). F
acilitie
s team
s sh
ould in
herit
the
spr
eads
heet
s afte
r ha
ndov
er. T
hey
shou
ld b
e up
date
d ov
er tim
e, and
use
d to
inform
for
mal p
ost-oc
cupa
ncy ev
alua
tions
.
D6
(D3
on
page
19)
Inco
rpor
ate
Soft
Land
ings
req
uire
men
tsin ten
der do
cum
ents,
and
evalua
te ten
der
resp
onse
s an
d re
sults
from
inte
rviews
To e
nsur
e th
at con
trac
tre
quire
men
ts are
wor
ded
tore
flect o
utpu
ts fro
m rev
iews
Projec
tm
anag
erClient
Pr
ojec
t m
anag
er
Lead
des
igne
r Co
nstruc
tor
M&E co
ntractor
Crea
te con
trac
t do
cum
ents,
review
and
sign-
off in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith d
esign
review
and
rea
lity-
chec
king
finding
s. R
eview ten
der
resp
onse
s ag
ains
tre
quire
men
ts
The
review
and
rea
lity-
chec
king
dec
isions
nee
d to
find
their way
into
sub
-con
trac
t te
nder
docu
men
ts, w
hich
sho
uld
be eva
luated
by th
e de
sign
ers be
fore
going
out
to
tend
er.
Apr
oces
s also
nee
ds to
be set
up
to rev
iew the
ten
der su
bmission
s an
d re
sults
fro
m ten
der
inte
rviews. Som
e su
b-co
ntracts will b
e m
ore
impo
rtan
t th
an oth
ers. The
increa
sing
prep
onde
ranc
e of
spe
cialist su
b-co
ntracts th
at in
clud
e be
spok
e co
ntro
ls sys
tem
s will n
eed
extra atte
ntion
to e
nsur
e th
e ve
ndor
s' sys
tem
s will satisfy the
req
uire
men
ts.
D7
Iterate
bet
wee
n stag
es D
1 to
D4
durin
g th
e de
sign
pro
cess as re
quire
d. The
seq
uenc
e, n
umbe
r of
iter
ations
and
partic
ipan
ts w
ill d
epen
d on
the
proc
urem
ent ro
ute
Stag
e 2 wor
kshe
et e
xam
ple: D
esign
*RASC
I. A sim
ple
matrix
for
tho
se in
a tea
m w
ho n
eed
to b
e eith
er h
eld
Resp
onsible, A
ccou
ntab
le, S
uppo
rted
, Con
sulte
d or
Inform
ed abo
ut a p
artic
ular top
ic.
Windo
w m
otor
s, for
exa
mple, req
uire
peo
ple
to spe
cify, ins
tall, com
mission
and
witn
ess th
eir te
sting.
28 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
soft
land
ings
tabl
es 2
7021
4_so
ft la
ndin
gs ta
bles
240
214.
qxd
04/
03/2
014
11:
37 P
age
2
Stag
e
Action
Purp
ose
Initiato
rPa
rticipan
ts
Scop
e of
dut
ies
Not
es
P1En
viro
nmen
tal a
nden
ergy
logg
ing
review
To clarif
y re
spon
sibilities an
d th
e scop
eof
ene
rgy logg
ing
and
review
Facilities m
anag
emen
tDes
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Review
and
agr
ee rou
tine
for fu
ture
logg
ing.
Inte
grate
with
the
req
uire
men
ts of th
e Bu
ilding
Logb
ook
The
ener
gy and
env
ironm
ental p
lan
and
the
targ
ets se
t ea
rlier
will in
fluen
ce lo
gging de
man
d. Soft tran
sfer
of d
ata will h
elp
redu
ce visits
by th
e de
sign
tea
m
P2Bu
ilding
read
ines
spr
ogram
me
To e
nsur
e co
ordina
tion
to site
activities
,an
d witn
essing
by th
e de
sign
er and
/or
client
rep
rese
ntative
Cons
truc
tor
Des
ign
team
, Clie
nt,
Cons
truc
tor, Us
erre
pres
entativ
e,Fa
cilities m
anag
er
Prov
ide
upda
ted
sub-
prog
ram
me
in g
ood
time
ahea
d of
any
com
mission
ing
start
Esse
ntial if th
e bu
ilding
read
ines
s team
are
to
be effec
tive.
Static com
mission
ing
(suc
h as
insp
ectio
ns, a
irtight
ness
chec
king
, and
windo
w o
peratio
n) sho
uld
be in
clud
ed
P3Co
mm
ission
ing
reco
rds ch
eck
To ver
ify ade
quac
y of
rec
ords
Facilities m
anag
erDes
ign
team
, Con
stru
ctor
Facilities m
anag
er
Includ
e ev
alua
tion
and
decision
point
s in d
esign
prog
ram
me
Includ
e en
ergy
per
form
ance
che
cks
P4Bu
ilding
services
maint
enan
ceco
ntract
To e
nsur
e th
ere
are
no g
aps in sup
port,
post-h
ando
ver
Facilities m
anag
erDes
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Facilities m
anag
er
Agr
ee sub
jects, targe
t(s) and
app
ropr
iate
mea
sure
men
t m
etho
dsIm
portan
t in h
elping
to
avoid
conf
usion
of roles
and
resp
onsibilities po
st-h
ando
ver
P5Training
prog
ram
me
To e
nsur
e ad
equa
tely trained
ope
ratio
nan
d m
aint
enan
ce staff are
in p
lace
, pre
-ha
ndov
er
Facilities m
anag
erFa
cilities m
anag
erBu
ilding
services
maint
enan
ce con
trac
tor
Agr
ee d
ecision
mak
ers an
d crite
ria for
sign-
offs
As P4
. Des
igne
rs also
need
to
be o
pen
to the
views of
oper
ationa
l staff
P6BM
S inte
rfac
ede
mon
stratio
nTo
dem
onstrate
ope
ratio
n an
d fin
e-tu
ning
of sy
stem
sDes
ign
team
Des
ign
team
, Con
stru
ctor
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilities m
anag
erBu
ilding
services
maint
enan
ce con
trac
tor
Dec
ide
form
of ince
ntive. Agr
ee targe
ts and
defin
e m
easu
rem
ent crite
riaAs P4
. Ope
ratio
nal s
taff also
need
to
be in
volved
in in
terfac
ede
velopm
ent, spe
cific
ation
and
review
whe
re p
ossible
P7Migratio
n plan
ning
To coo
rdinate
mov
e-in w
ith site
cont
inuing
activities
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilites
man
ager
Des
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Set up
mee
tings
It’s im
portan
t th
at the
des
ign
team
and
con
stru
ctor
are
not
left
out of
the
loop
dur
ing
user
logistics plan
ning
P8Af
tercare
team
hom
eTo
provide
visible and
acces
sible
hom
e for
the
afte
rcare
team
dur
ing
the
initial p
ost-
hand
over
pha
se
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilites
man
ager
Des
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Arran
ge suitable
wor
kplace
with
datac
oms lin
ksEs
sent
ial if th
e afte
rcare
team
is to
be effec
tive
P9Co
mpile b
uilding
user
s gu
ide
To h
elp
build
ing
user
s to
bet
ter
unde
rstand
and
ope
rate
the
building
effic
ient
ly in
the
man
ner en
visa
ged
byth
e de
sign
tea
m
Des
ign
team
Client
User
rep
rese
ntative
Com
pile g
uide
in b
ook form
. Con
tent
to
includ
einform
ation
on lo
cal h
vac an
d lig
hting
cont
rols,
ener
gy and
water
efficient
fea
ture
s, sec
urity
and
acce
ss, f
urnitu
re, s
pace
use
, cyc
le sto
rage
, and
the
principles
of de
sign
and
ope
ratio
n.
The gu
ide sh
ould be writ
ten clea
rly and
avo
id ove
ruse
of
tech
nica
l jargo
n. Illustratio
ns aid com
preh
ension
. The
guide
shou
ld b
e m
ade
available
in h
ard
and
elec
tron
ic for
mats.
Cons
ult th
e facilities team
and
building
user
s on
con
tent
. File
aco
py in
the
O&M rec
ords
. Be
prep
ared
for
rev
isions
after
oper
ationa
l fine-
tuning
P10
Tech
nica
l guida
nce
To sm
ooth
trans
ition
s to
loca
l ope
ratio
nby
the
clie
nt’s fac
ilitie
s m
anag
emen
tteam
Des
ign
team
Facilities m
anag
emen
tsp
ecialis
tsPr
ovide
a bu
ilding
oper
ations
tec
hnical g
uide
.Re
late
to
the
Build
ing
Logb
ook. Liaise
with
the
facilities m
anag
er ove
r co
nten
tCo
py file
d in the
O&M rec
ords
and
/or th
e bu
ilding
logb
ook
P11
O&M m
anua
l rev
iew
To che
ck con
tent
of th
e O&M M
anua
lsFa
cilities m
anag
erVe
rify co
nten
t an
d sign
off
Shou
ld b
e co
ordina
ted
with
P4, P
5, P
9 an
d P1
0
Stag
e 3
wor
kshe
et e
xam
ple: Pre
-han
dove
r
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 29
soft
land
ings
tabl
es 2
7021
4_so
ft la
ndin
gs ta
bles
240
214.
qxd
04/
03/2
014
11:
37 P
age
3
Stag
e 4
wor
kshe
et exa
mple: In
itial after
care
Stag
e
Action
Purp
ose
Initiato
rPa
rticipan
ts
Scop
e of
dut
ies
Not
es
A1
Reside
nt o
n-site
atten
danc
eSp
ot, r
espo
nd to, and
help
to d
eal
with
em
erging
issu
esDes
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Team
mem
bers res
iden
t in the
building
for (n
)da
ys p
er w
eek
The
num
ber of
day
s pe
r wee
k will d
epen
d on
the
size
and
com
plex
ity of th
e bu
ilding. Tea
m m
embe
rs sho
uld
have
goo
d pe
ople, p
ractical cap
ability and
con
tinuity w
ithth
e pr
ojec
t
A2
Prov
ide
wor
kplace
and
dataco
mm
s lin
ksTo
give
reside
nt tea
m m
embe
rs a
visible
hom
e with
in the
new
build
ing
User
or client
repr
esen
tativ
eUs
er rep
rese
ntative, clie
ntre
pres
entativ
eSe
t up
and
mak
e av
ailable
prior to
actua
lha
ndov
erSe
e pr
e-ha
dove
r ac
tions
. The
wor
kplace
mus
t be
available
from
the
firs
t da
y of
occup
ation
A3
Build
ing
use
guidan
ceTo
introd
uce
user
s to
how
the
irbu
ilding
oper
ates
, and
the
use
of
loca
l con
trols. This stag
e is u
sefu
lfor ob
taining
feed
back
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Typica
l use
r gr
oups
Participate
in (n)
foc
us g
roup
s of
building
user
s to
pres
ent ke
y inform
ation. In
trod
uce
the
build
ing
user
guide
and
discu
ss views an
d qu
eries
Ant
icipate
at le
ast tw
o m
eetin
gs. S
ee p
re-h
ando
ver
actio
ns. M
entio
n th
e he
lplin
e an
d/or
new
slet
ter
A4
Tech
nica
l guida
nce
To sm
ooth
trans
ition
to
loca
lop
eration
by the
clie
nt’s fac
ilitie
sm
anag
emen
t team
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Build
ing
faciliies
man
agem
ent
repr
esen
tativ
es
Participate
in (n)
mee
tings
with
the
fac
ilitie
sm
anag
emen
t re
pres
entativ
es to
introd
uce co
nten
tof the
tec
hnical guida
nce, and
exp
lain sys
tem
san
d discus
s view
s
Ant
icipate
two
mee
tings
. Ide
ally, t
his sh
ould h
ave
alread
yha
ppen
ed d
uring
the
pre-
hand
over
stage
A5
Helpline/
newslet
ter
To e
ncou
rage
loca
l fee
dbac
k an
dco
mm
unicate
status
of issu
esDes
ign
team
User
rep
rese
ntative
Build
ing
oper
ator
and
use
rre
pres
entativ
es. C
onstru
ctor
The
design
tea
m to
set up
a sim
ple
bulle
tinbo
ard, p
ossibly lin
ked
to the
clie
nt’s in
tran
et, f
ore-
mail d
ialogu
e an
d po
sting
of in
form
ation
upda
tes. The
use
r re
pres
entativ
e sh
ould aim
to
upda
te the
web
site
or ne
wletter
s fortnigh
tly and
to m
oder
ate
user
com
men
ts
Keep
this sim
ple, n
ot too
tec
hnical and
eas
y to
upd
ate.
It’s be
st if
the
new
slet
ter or
helpline
is ava
ilable
elec
tron
ically
A6
Walka
bout
sTo
spo
t en
erging
issu
es and
obse
rve
occu
patio
n us
age
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
If re
quire
d: the
use
rs, t
hem
aint
enan
ce tea
m, a
nd the
com
mission
ing
engine
ers
Roam
building
inform
ally o
n a re
gular ba
sis.
Mak
e sp
ot che
cks with
instru
men
ts if
nec
essa
ryCo
mbine
with
oth
er visits
as ap
prop
riate
. See
and
be
seen
30 the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK
soft
land
ings
tabl
es 2
7021
4_so
ft la
ndin
gs ta
bles
240
214.
qxd
04/
03/2
014
11:
37 P
age
4
the SOFT LANDINGS FRAMEWORK 31
Stag
e 5 wor
kshe
et e
xam
ple: Exten
ded
afte
rcare
Years 1-
3
Stag
e
Action
Purp
ose
Initiato
rPa
rticipan
ts
Scop
e of
dut
ies
Not
es
Y1Af
tercare
review
mee
tings
Review
pro
gres
sDes
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Client
rep
rese
ntative
User
rep
rese
ntative
Participate
on o
n-site
mee
tings
Four
to
six m
eetin
gs in
the
10
mon
ths follo
wing
wee
ks 1-8
sho
uld
bead
equa
te
Y2Lo
g an
d review
ener
gy u
seTo
provide
the
bas
is for
com
paris
on w
ith the
ener
gy p
lan
and
to assist fin
e-tu
ning
of
system
s
Facilities
repr
esen
tativ
eDes
ign
team
Fa
cilities re
pres
entativ
e to
mon
itor an
dforw
ard-
read
eve
ry (n)
wee
ks. D
esign
team
mem
ber to
rev
iew rea
ding
sev
ery (n
) wee
ks
The
freq
uenc
y will d
epen
d on
the
exten
t of
sub
-met
ering
and
the
quality
of th
e BM
S lin
ks. M
onth
ly rea
ding
s sh
ould b
e a m
inim
um. t
hede
sign
may
be
able to
log
cons
umpt
ion
dire
ctly via the
bm
s, b
ut this
mus
t no
t re
plac
e th
e facilities m
anag
er’s m
onito
ring
Y3Sy
stem
s an
d en
ergy
review
To m
onito
r ov
erall e
nery u
sage
and
sys
tem
sDes
ign
team
Facilities
repr
esen
tativ
e
Des
ign
team
Facilities re
pres
entativ
eClient
rep
rese
ntative
User
rep
rese
ntative
Maint
enan
ce tea
m
Participate
in rev
iew m
eetin
g ev
ery (n
)wee
ksSix-m
onth
ly is
sug
gested
. This ac
tivity
may
nee
d to
be
mor
efreq
uent
, tho
ugh
som
e ca
n be
don
e re
mot
ely an
d m
uch
of the
res
tab
sorb
ed in
to stage
s Y1
and
Y4
Y4Fine
-tun
e sy
stem
sTo
adjus
t sy
stem
s for se
ason
al cha
nge
and
any em
erge
nt u
sage
patte
rns
Facilities m
anag
erDes
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Facilities re
pres
entativ
e
Carry ou
t fin
e-tu
ning
at m
onth
(s)
The
freq
uenc
y will d
epen
d on
sea
sona
l tim
ing
and
any pa
rticular
emer
gent
issu
es. T
he m
aint
enan
ce tea
m and
com
mission
ing
engine
ers m
ay som
etim
es n
eed
to b
e invo
lved
Y5Re
cord
fine-
tuning
and
chan
ges of
use
To h
elp
prog
ressive
chan
ges
Facilities m
anag
erDes
ign
team
Co
nstruc
tor
Facilities re
pres
entativ
e
Reco
rd cha
nges
to
system
s in the
build
ing
logb
ook an
d ad
d to
the
O&M
Man
uals
Esse
ntial f
or accur
ate
com
paris
on of fore
cast e
nerg
y us
e
Y6Helpline/
newslet
ter
To e
ncou
rage
loca
l fee
dbac
k an
dco
mm
unicate
status
of issu
esDes
ign
team
Facilities an
d us
erre
pres
entativ
esUp
date
eve
ry (n)
wee
ksA m
onth
ly u
pdate
shou
ld b
e ad
equa
te
Y7Walka
bout
sTo
spo
t em
erging
issu
es and
obs
erve
occu
patio
n us
age
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Roam
building
inform
ally o
n a re
gular
basis
Ever
y tw
o m
onth
s is a g
ood
base
line; com
bine
with
oth
er visits
as
appr
opria
te. S
ee and
be
seen
Y8Mea
sure
env
ironm
ental
and/
or e
nerg
ype
rfor
man
ce
To com
pare
actua
l aga
inst for
ecas
t targ
ets
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Mea
sure
per
form
ance
to
agre
edpr
ogram
me
Use
to in
form
the
end
of Ye
ar 1
rev
iew m
eetin
g ag
enda
Y9En
d of
yea
r review
To rev
iew ove
rall bu
ilding
perfor
man
ceDes
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
Des
ign
team
Cons
truc
tor
User
rep
rese
ntative
Facilities re
pres
entativ
eClient
rep
rese
ntative
Participate
in ann
ual m
eetin
gCo
ordina
te w
ith the
end
of de
fects lia
bility sign
-off. This is also
the
oppo
rtun
ity to
decide
any
cha
nge
of foc
us for
the
com
ing
year
soft
land
ings
tabl
es 2
7021
4_so
ft la
ndin
gs ta
bles
240
214.
qxd
04/
03/2
014
11:
37 P
age
5
This document was authored by the Usable Buildings Trust, the originator ofSoft Landings, Mark Way, and Roderic Bunn of BSRIA. For more informationcontact [email protected] or go to www.softlandings.org.uk
Soft Landings:
Provides a unified vehicle for engaging with outcomes throughout the process of briefing, design anddelivery. It dovetails with energy performance certification, building logbooks, green leases, and corporate
social responsibility.
It can run alongside any procurement process. It helps design and building teams to appreciate how
buildings are used, managed and maintained.
It provides the best opportunity for producing low-carbon buildings that meet their design targets. It
includes fine-tuning in the early days of occupation and provides a natural route for post-occupancyevaluation.
It costs very little, well within the margin of competitive bids. During design and construction, SoftLandings helps performance-related activities to be carried out more systematically. There is some extrawork during the three-year aftercare period, but the costs are modest in relation to the value added to theclient’s building.
Most of all, Soft Landings creates virtuous circles for all and offers the best hope for truly integrated, robustand sustainable design.
Soft Landings why bother?