Soft Landings Framework

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.



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 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.



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



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.



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


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.




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



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.



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.



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).



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.



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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


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




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


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.


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.


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


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


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


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?

Documents

Soft Landings Framework