Approaching Developed Design

After the creativity and freedom often characteristic of the design process during Stage 2, the Developed Design stage can feel like a series of proofs for the propositions made during Concept Design. The design processes employed during the Developed Design stage require disciplined and coordinated scrutiny across the design team in order to ensure success against the parameters set for the project. This stage also involves considerable iteration in pursuit of a design that carries the concept forward but that also prepares the components of the project for the rigours of Stage 4 Technical Design in a way that avoids needing to amend the Stage 3 design to accommodate new factors.

It is within RIBA Plan of Work Stage 3 that the efforts of the design team really become fixed into place, and the various Project Strategies set up in earlier Plan of Work stages converge to make the coordinated design more rigorous and easier to achieve. We have seen in Chapter 2 that a planning application may have been programmed in at Stage 2 for a project- or client-specific reason. For many projects, however, the planning task sits more naturally within Stage 3. At this stage, the project will have reached a point in its development at which many more significant decisions will have been made and coordinated with the outputs of the whole design team. The client will also be able to really see the qualities and detail of the building that they have commissioned, and will have confidence in the design and cost information that is supporting the design. Planning applications made at the end of Stage 3 are significantly more robust than earlier-stage submissions, the designers having had the opportunity to produce the kind of detail that planners and the public are looking for from their built environment.

The planning process places the project into the public domain, and all the documentation that accompanies a planning application becomes publicly accessible material. Despite a pre-planning application process, which seeks to minimise areas of concern or difference between the project team and the planning authority’s team and policy documentation, this is an uncertain time in the project’s life. The planning system and its decisions are controlled initially by local, democratic processes, and, although a variety of preparations can be made prior to a determination of the application, the progress of the project beyond this point rests with the political leaders of the locality.

What is Stage 3 Developed Design?

The Developed Design forms Stage 3 of the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 and represents the culmination of the resolved and coordinated design. It is the fourth stage of the Plan of Work framework and, in this Stage Guide series, sits with Stage 2 Concept Design as one of the two stages at which significant iteration occurs in the creation of a building project following the Initial Project Brief but before the technical detail of Stage 4. The completion of Stage 3 is often regarded as the threshold between creating and delivering a project.

What is the delivery of Concept Design in detail?

Concept Design creates an intention. For example, in our project Scenario E, in order to create an ‘industrial aesthetic’, the architect wants the structural steelwork junctions and air-handling ductwork to be on show below the floor soffit. They know that to pull this off a high level of coordination is necessary, and that both structural and services engineers need to ‘buy into’ the concept as it involves them also thinking about what their elements of design will look like. In another example for the university building in our Scenario C, large sections of wall space need to be left free of services equipment or structure in order to act as display and projection space. The services design will need to respond to this requirement by avoiding switches, thermometers, alarm sensors, etc. on these walls, even though a standard design solution would inevitably seek to place some of these items on them.

The design element in question might be quite substantial – like a ‘concept I’ that has been conceived as part of a relevant street scene, responding to an Initial Project Brief that required a ‘civic’ presence. The choice of materials, the detailing for weathering, the marking of openings and expansion joints all contribute to the eventual impression of the façade. Developed Design proves that the delivery of these ideas in reality will contribute to the whole design, as had been envisaged during Stage 2.

During the Developed Design stage, other design team members become more actively engaged in responding to the spatial and environmental parameters of the building, and this is where the rigorously written and reviewed Project Strategies come into their own. A well-constructed strategy sets out the requirements of the brief, the condition under which those requirements might or must be met and any existing or presumed constraints that need to be taken into account. The Concept Design will have illustrated how these Project Strategies are most likely to be met in conjunction with each other, and when they subsequently come under review during the Developed Design stage it will be clear how the design team must work to deliver these coordinated elements of the building project. Clear Project Strategies will be able to relate these design intentions, whether it is the same designer working on the project or new members of the design team.

Clash Avoidance Using Bim

A key component of the coordinating design task is avoiding clashes between building elements which if remaining undetected can cost time and money on site modifying or changing aspects of the design. Typical clashes of building components that require detection at this stage might include

• Underground services and foundation arrangements
• Structural beams and horizontal services
• Structural bracing and external wall elements, including doors, windows and insulation
• Vertical service risers and structural and architectural components
• Bulkheads over stairs and other areas where head height is critical
• Roofing components, particularly awkward geometry or curved elements with structure and building services.

Building Information Modelling (BIM) and the emergence of 3D software tools has made clash detection much simpler and at Stage 3 allows modifications to take place without consequences on the building contract. The construction industry is aiming to achieve Level 2 BIM (Managed 3D model environment for separately produced discipline models) for publically procured works by 2016. Level 3 BIM envisages a single model worked on by the design team where clash avoidance happens during the normal course of the design developing.

3.1 A sketch comparison of a Concept Design and Developed Design from the same project.

Describing the Project

All project team members will be familiar with describing the building project to a range of stakeholders. The language, expressions and detail used to do this change, of course, depending on who the audience is. These descriptors are important as part of the Information Exchanges that happen all through the project. Obviously, verbal exchanges are not often recorded, and design dialogue of this nature represents a high proportion of the development time spent between design team members exploring and modifying the building design.

So a Stage 2-type statement like ‘the building envelope will be made of brick’ is enough to evoke a sense of that design decision, but during the Developed Design stage the architect might add that ‘the simple “punched” hole in the brickwork is lined with an aluminium flashing to four sides with the window frame set back from the face by 250 mm’. This better understanding of how the brick will form each window opening and how it is finished will add detail, complexity, time or cost to the project as a whole.

Also, it should be possible to be clear about the dimension, performance in use, availability and cost of the brick without writing a full specification for it. If as many elements of the building’s construction as possible are identified with this level of information, the Developed Design will evoke a substance and quality in all respects that will survive the investigative rigours of future stages.

What Effect will Procurement: decisions have on Stage 3?

As discussed in Chapter 2, the procurement of design and construction services for building projects will vary depending on the choice of Building Contract and the client’s priorities for the three principal components of any project – quality, time and cost.

The impact of procurement is tracked in the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 under Task Bar 2. This is a variable task bar that can have very different levels of activity in each stage, depending on the decisions made at the initial briefing stage. The amount of work required from the design team across all Plan of Work stages changes very little between procurement routes – the difference generally lying in who the Information Exchanges are prepared for, and the level of engagement of the design team with the client or end user in preparing the design through Stages 2 and 3.

3.2 An extract from a procurement choice flow diagram relating task bar activity to Plan of Work stages under different procurement priorities.

The choices made for procurement of the building project will be fundamental to the nature of relationships in the project team. These choices do not affect the sequence of work described in the RIBA Plan of Work, or the type or level of completeness of the technical design information required. They can affect the information to be included in information exchanges, but do not diminish the need to put in place Project Strategies, information protocols and cost information at each stage.

For more information on this subject, please refer to Construction: A Practical Guide to the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 Stages 4, 5 and 6 by Phil Holden – the third book in this series.

How Does the Design Programme: in Stage 3 differ from that in Stage 2?

At Stage 2, the Design Programme organises elements of the emerging design in relationship to one another, resulting in a strategic Concept Design. During Stage 3, the Design Programme relates directly to coordination of the activity of the design team. Encouraging design declaration and dialogue to avoid conflicts in building elements results in a fully coordinated Developed Design at the Stage 3 Information Exchange.

The Design Programme will be the responsibility of the lead designer, and during Stage 3 it sets out appropriate time periods for key aspects of the Developed Design, design team and client meetings and design workshop events (discussed in Chapter 2). It can be used very effectively by the lead designer to encourage successful design team collaboration during Stage 3. It will culminate in an agreed and coordinated design that goes forward for approval to the client. The Design Programme will most likely at this stage include planning application and Building Control procedures, and may also include third party consultation or other stakeholder events that may impact on the design process.

The reason for the change of emphasis on collaboration in the Design Programme during Stage 3 is twofold:

• Information at Stage 3 is used to demonstrate that the Concept Design can be realised. Real components and construction products are brought together by different design team members to form a building that captures the essence of the Concept Design and can be costed. It is important to avoid change after planning permission has been granted and as the project enters into Stage 4.
• At Stage 3, time is the element of the project most likely to have defined parameters. At the outset of the project it is relatively easy for a client to say, irrespective of the project’s scale, ‘I’d like an x building project, built for £y by z date.’ Unlike cost, which can fluctuate during the development stages, time is a linear factor in the project and a day lost is lost for good. This fact makes the management of the Design Programme during Stage 3 a critical contribution to the success of the Project Programme.

3.3 An extract from a Design Programme.

As the project enters Stage 3, the key project milestones that represent significant financial commitment from the client are coming into sharp focus. Typically, a planning submission fixes the design scope, and a start of construction on site is programmed in with a handover date for the completed project in view. By comparison with Stage 2, the Stage 3 Design Programme feels targeted and very time driven. Meeting deadlines to maintain programme, working collaboratively with other design team members and producing a coordinated design will result in a qualitative Information Exchange on time with good Cost Information and significantly less prospect of future design change.

What Do you Need for a Planning Submission?: (Validation checklists, information schedules, resource planning)

For the majority of projects, Stage 3 will include a planning application submission. This decision will have been taken during the Stage 1 briefing activity and be recorded on the Plan of Work Variable Task Bar 4, (Town) Planning. Depending on the nature and scale of the project, a significant period of formal pre-application engagement might be dedicated to meeting with and understanding the planning authority’s opinion, planning policy and submission requirements. These activities will be recorded on the Design Programme, as their outcomes affect the iterative design process and, consequently, potentially affect the programme. Each planning application will be made up of validation requirements from a national and local list. It is good practice to formulate a validation checklist at the outset of Stage 3 in order to inform the scope of work, responsibilities and timescales for each piece of work, as they will inform other parts of the scope. Validation requirements are often set out in a checklist format, and usually available as a downloadable document from the local council’s website.

These validation checklists are very likely to include a variety of specialist reports, which might form part of the planning-submission package depending on the scale and complexity of the project. If these required items are missing, the submission will not be registered as a ‘live’ application and, potentially, delay might be caused to the programme. It is quite usual for urban planning applications to be accompanied by the following reports:

• Desktop Site Investigation – the site conditions are recorded using historical maps to assess previous development; archive information on utilities, mineworkings or other licensed underground activity are logged in order to be able to consider site conditions for foundations and other civil-engineering structures.
• Geotechnical surveys, including contamination assessments – intrusive ground surveys using boreholes, trial pits and window sampling to confirm load-bearing capacities and contaminants.
• Ecology surveys and tree surveys – recording biodiversity and ecological value, and identifying species of flora and fauna.
• Heritage Impact Statement or Conservation Area Statement – considering impact of proposals on listed buildings or structures in Conservation Areas.
• Planning Statement – planning policy referred to as justification for the scheme being acceptable.
• Transport Assessment (for large projects), Transport Statement, Green Travel Plan outline.
• Noise or Vibration Survey – recording of noise or vibration factors that may affect proposed use.
• Statement of Community Involvement – it has become common practice to organise a consultation or engagement event with the general public before a planning submission. Comments and actions leading from those consultations are recorded in this statement.
• Design and Access Statement – an explanation of site context, design concept and design development, and proposals for accessibility across the project. Information produced during Stages 2 and 3 and have informed the design should be included in this statement.

Rural or suburban applications might require some of the above and the following reports:

• Sequential Test or Town Centre Assessment – to resist unnecessary out-of-town development and ensure sustainable settlements.
• Visual Impact Assessment – consideration of impact of development on established or relevant views.

It is worth noting that this list in effect becomes the majority of the contents of the Information Exchange at the completion of Plan of Work Stage 3 – and it may be worth considering the Design and Access Statement as the ‘organising document’ for the design information and these various reports, acting as one document doing two jobs.

The point to make here is that each of these reporting requirements will take time, and they must be planned appropriately within the Design Programme. Project Strategies are ideal for identifying what documents should be commissioned and when. Some of them will respond to project proposals, as they are reporting on the scale of impact of the proposed scheme (for example, the ecologist’s assessment of wildlife habitat impacts). But some need to be carried out earlier, as they will impact on the design proposals (for example, the Site Investigation might identify an area of the site not able to be economically developed due to poor load-bearing capacity).

These reports should form part of the formal pre-application process, so that any impacts identified can be mitigated in the scheme design before proceeding to a planning-application submission. Careful and early consideration of these validation requirements will inform the Stage 3 Design Programme and help to ensure adherence to the target submission date for planning.

Reviewing Stage 2 Project Strategies

There is mention earlier in this chapter of the need to review some Project Strategies during Stage 3. All Project Strategies should be reviewed during this stage, even if some require only minor or no adjustment in order to remain relevant. The aim of the design team should be to complete the stage with a fully aligned set of Project Strategies, with changes from the previous stage highlighted.

3.4 A generic Project Strategy review cycle.

During Stage 3, the level of detail that needs to be declared and understood is likely to warrant very significant updating of several Project Strategies that, in some instances, are linked. For instance:

• The Maintenance and Operational Strategy will be able to develop from a set of client requirements laid down at Plan of Work Stage 1 into a detailed set of provisions that the building design must allow for at this stage in order to avoid unwanted design change in later stages. For instance, the developed building design will make provision in its accommodation schedule for plant areas that during Stage 3 will be sized accurately, with layouts produced indicating the main incoming and outgoing services. Optimum locations for service risers, cleaner’s equipment and general storage around the building will have been chosen, and each of these will inform the provisions of the Maintenance and Operational Strategy.
• The Health and Safety Strategy will be very significantly informed by the development of the plant room and roof-access protocols, and plant-replacement strategies, which all form part of the review of the Maintenance and Operational Strategy at this stage.
• These decisions together with design development in aspects of off-site assembly and manufacture will in turn impact on the Construction Strategy and the review of project Risk Assessments.

The review process illustrated in Figure 3.4 will be happening throughout the Stage 3 period, informed by the continued and qualitative development of the building project. The design team will need to be alert to the issues that impact on their sphere of operation, and perhaps influence the design decisions they make during this stage. The Project Execution Plan will include a review regime for Project Strategies, setting out when the reviews should happen, who should attend review meetings or workshops, and the expected levels of output from these. For example, the Communications Strategy for the project will have established how digital communications and digital collaboration platforms will be utilised, and Stage 3 is a good time to review how that is working. The Project Execution Plan will be subject to review itself, and this process will help to record where changes are made across all Project Strategies and act as a directory of all activity during Stage 3.

Opportunities for Research: in developing Project Strategies

In an ideal scenario, Project Strategies will develop in a linear pattern. Having set out at an early stage what the broad Project Objectives are in each specific strategy area, their development will follow the pattern of increasing knowledge around subject detail and emerging project criteria.

At Stage 2, the Project Strategies will have been reviewed in order to take account of new and emerging factors in the project – for example:

• The shape or massing of the building might affect the Sustainability Strategy.
• Site Information might influence the Construction Strategy or procurement strategy.
• The height of the building and the type of roof being proposed might impact on the Health and Safety Strategy.

As discussed above, these Project Strategies will be reviewed again, during Stage 3, in order to reflect the level of technical product and construction detail being investigated as the project become less generic. The key driver of this activity in Stage 3 is the need to increase the amount of fixed Project Information and to reduce to an absolute minimum the opportunity for principal project criteria to change during Stage 4 Technical Design.

During the individual and collective processes undertaken by the design team leading up to Stage 3, there invariably will have been opportunities for research projects to take place. In some cases, the development of new approaches, techniques or products that could emerge from the requirements of the project – and the desire of the project team to innovate or explore new possibilities – will have enhanced the project design outcomes at Stage 2. During Stage 3, the status of these research projects will be reviewed and possibly extended, provided that their Project Outcomes can be realised within the Stage 3 Design Programme.

This form of research and innovation in building projects is often associated with expensive schemes that can afford the prototyping and testing of significant new approaches to construction, or academic research projects that take time and have the objective of broad application in the construction industry. This scale of research often appears quite glamorous, but on occasion promotes very significant technological advances in building elements. These usually happen in conjunction with manufacturers and their product or process designers, who can see commercial benefit in the end product of the research. Much more common are circumstances within a building project that offer the opportunity for a piece of simple and inexpensive research. This might revolve around processes within a design practice rather than products that are specific to the project, but – if well set up, executed, recorded and disseminated – it will grow the knowledge base of the practice and the design team, and may have reputational advantage for the project and the design team involved.

The seeming familiarity or simplicity of these project-based examples indicates that simple research of one sort or another happens more often than imagined. Following the framework of the RIBA Plan of Work 2013, and recording outcomes formally, helps to encourage research attitudes and allows the results to be shared easily. Such activity increases the knowledge base within the individual practice in the first instance, but then, more broadly, across the design or project team.

Setting Up Change Control Procedures: for this and future stages

On larger and, in particular, more complex building projects, Change Control Procedures may have been introduced before Stage 3. In all cases, it is a very useful project-control mechanism to introduce Change Control Procedures from the outset of Stage 3 particularly as the concept design and the aligned final project brief have been signed off by the client. Change control is a clear method for logging the following systematically:

• Changes to project criteria and detail.
• Who, or what circumstances, made the change necessary.
• The estimated cost of the change (design and construction costs).
• Any impacts on the Design and/or Project Programme.
• All the Project Information that needs revision in order to reflect the change.

A Change Control Procedure ensures that the client signs off the change before it is circulated to the design team to undertake the revisions necessary. It is good practice in a collaborative design team environment to have tested the proposed change with design team members, so that the impacts are widely understood and agreed.

3.5 An example of change-control data template.

This mechanism of recording changes to the design, particularly during Stage 3, allows progressive design changes and cost increases and decreases to be tracked and monitored. During project meetings, the record of change control creates a useful history of change decisions, the reasons for the changes and a log of the authorisation for change. allowing informed discussion on the subject if required. This management element of the project is most likely to be encapsulated within the Project Execution Plan at Stage 1, along with a record of who takes responsibility for keeping the change control records up to date.

Developing and executing third party consultations

No building project exists in isolation, and in every case a series of third party consultations needs to take place in order to inform the project scope, cost and programme. Stage 3 is an ideal period in which to undertake these consultations, as the design team are able to say generally what the project proposal is and to absorb the information from the consultation into the Developed Design workflow. Third party consultations are noted under Task Bar 5 Suggested Key Support Tasks.

Here are some third parties commonly consulted during Stage 3, and what to expect from them:

• Amenity and civic societies – special-interest groups that may be active in the project location. For example, The Georgian Society, The Victorian Society or The Twentieth Century Society. By its very nature, the commentary received from amenity or civic societies will have a narrow focus and rarely seek to see scheme proposals in the round.
• Utilities providers – water, gas, electricity and telecoms services will all be delivered to the new project by different organisations. Each utility, in turn, may need to consult separate infrastructure, distribution and connections companies. Long lead-in times for new services often impact on the construction programme, and early knowledge of this can help establish the programme’s critical path.
• General public – for around 30 years now, it has been considered good practice by many clients – particularly public-sector and quasi-public-sector bodies, like Housing Associations – to hold a form of consultation on proposed developments before they are submitted for planning permission. Listening to local people will inform design proposals, and may mitigate formal objections during the planning application period itself.
• Design Review – CABE (the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment) introduced a UK-wide network of Design Review Panels that provide an independent voice for design quality prior to planning. Design review commentary is usually extremely helpful at Stage 3 in identifying both strong and weak points in the design.
• Building for Life 12 – applicable to residential schemes, Building for Life produces a score out of 12 for the quality of place that a scheme promotes.

These consultations make take the form of relatively short presentations, longer exhibitions or workshops around specific interest groups. Such events can appear time-consuming when developing the Design Programme, but they do contribute considerably to the completeness of the Developed Design, informing the review of Project Strategies for subsequent stages, and therefore often save time resolving incomplete design thinking later on when there is less design flexibility. Avoiding pressure to resolve design matters in later stages also benefits the quality of the design, as decisions are made with appropriate information and time to consider options.

3.6 A process map for third party consultations.

Examples of Third Party Consultations

The following bullet points provide a brief illustration of some of the types of consultation events that even a modest building project might benefit from. Clearly, some of these events can relate directly to the continual review of specific Project Strategies and inform the stage-completion Information Exchanges of these. Examples of consultee organisations are given in each case.

• A user group representative of the people who will use the building and who have specific requirements that need to be catered for. This group might meet three or four times during the design process in order to share needs and provide comments on designs as they evolve – eg a tenants’ association development subcommittee.
• A special workshop event with the whole project team represented in order to review accessibility issues – not only from a statutory-compliance point of view, but also with regard to whether any of these issues form part of the ‘identity’ of the building or a particular service that the client wishes to promote from the new premises. Some projects will have an accessibility consultant, who will lead on this aspect of the Developed Design stage (accessibility strategy) – eg the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB).
• A design workshop with relevant design team members and client end user or facilities management representatives, if appointed, on maintenance and plant-replacement strategies; maintenance regimes, as far as they are understood; and contract cycles (Maintenance and Operational Strategy) – eg the appointed building caretaker or facilities manager.
• A design scenario workshop with relevant design team members and client end user or facilities management representatives, if appointed, to review how all daily operations, including reception function, will work; communications equipment and data installations; ‘first in/last out’ security sequence and protocols for alarms, including personal-safety issues that might arise from after-hours working; CCTV and other security installations, including car-parking arrangements and the protocols and requirements of fire drills and evacuations; and protocols for alarm performance in relation to external and emergency services (Operational Strategy). There should be an opportunity for the comments and requirements recorded by the first of each of these design workshops to be illustrated within the design context and relayed back to the group for further comment – ideally, if time permits, within the Stage 3 Design Programme – eg the security contractor; the Secured by Design Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO), a member of the local police force who advises on security in designs.
• A public consultation can take the form of an exhibition or a more interactive event. The aims of the consultation should be discussed and agreed with the project team before the event. Comments and observations should be encouraged via an easy-to-use method, but it should be clear to members of the public attending how the client and design team intend to respond to their comments. How is feedback going to be delivered? Is there a publicity opportunity for the future project, of which this public consultation can form a part? What should the interaction with local ward councillors, planning committee members and officers, and other statutory consultees be at this stage? The planning application and the procedures that lead to a determination of that application are embedded in local democratic processes, and there is a need to understand – particularly in relation to controversial schemes or land-use proposals – how best to frame the supporting arguments for the project against the potential for, and content of, objections throughout the application period. Public consultations held prior to a planning submission can often act as a test ground for these opposing arguments – eg the developer, local councillor(s), residents’ associations.

In the context of the RIBA Plan of Work 2013, it could be relatively easy to underestimate the powerful outcomes from a properly planned and executed consultation programme. Timely consultation of interested third parties creates a constructive working relationship, and informs the design process before the stage at which consultee input might create abortive work. On the other hand, a thoroughly worked-through Design Programme naturally seeks comment and critique on evolving design issues, and these opinions inform both the design process and the criteria that will eventually govern the building project becoming a success or not.

What Format Does Cost Information: take at Stage 3?

A design team that understands the cost of construction and maintains an interest in developing Cost Information is well placed to complete Stage 3 with a design that remains within cost parameters, and with suitable design development allowances for Plan of Work Stage 4 Technical Design. Cost Information during this stage will inevitably rely on historical elemental cost data for construction types. This will produce a ‘Construction Cost’ estimate, and to complete the cost plan the cost consultant will use industry-standard indexed predictions on cost inflation for materials and labour, together with project-specific contingency sums against known project expenditure (for example, furniture and fittings) and some general contingency sums for possible future discoveries.

Cost Information at Stage 3 is usually presented as showing the main elements of the building (eg substructure, superstructure, building services). These elements will have varying levels of detail behind them, depending on the nature of the project and the extent of research undertaken into the cost of building components and products as described earlier. The level of cost detail gathered from design workshops, product manufacturers and other cost data will be variable, and the design team must work together to provide the best possible cost-planning information. Where detail of certain elements is less robust, the lead designer should work closely with the cost consultant to make certain that the contained in estimate allowances are realistic and appropriate.

3.7 Types of cost data set up in a tabular form for cost planning.

The Importance of Sustainability: running throughout the project

Task Bar 6 on the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 makes provision for a sustainability checkpoint at each stage. Every building project will have a set of sustainability matrices mapped out at the Initial Project Brief stage, which will be measured during progress. Some of these may be funding requirements, client targets or external stakeholder provisions that need to be met. It is important to distinguish between those external goals and aspirations set out to allow the project to be realised from those that may be best-practice goals for the construction industry, personal or team targets or innovation targets, which do not have a bearing on whether the project proceeds. These two things though do come together to form the Sustainability Strategy.

It has been clear for a number of years now that new building projects have a substantial contribution to make to UK and global carbon-reduction targets, along with other environmental targets on resource usage. There are many ways of a project achieving a meaningful contribution to a sustainable future, and at the Stage 3 Information Exchange the methods committed to and means of achieving these targets need to be embedded in the design and cost information.

Stage 3 Sustainability Checkpoints from the Plan of Work ask:

• Has a formal sustainability assessment been carried out? If it has at an earlier stage, has it been reviewed during Stage 3?
• Have an interim Building Regulations Part L (conservation of fuel and power) assessment and a design stage carbon/energy declaration been undertaken?
• Has the design been reviewed in order to identify opportunities to reduce resource use and waste, and the results been recorded?

Establishing a Sign-Off Protocol: for Stage 3 completion

Under an earlier section of this chapter, the possibility of Stage 3 being the end of a commission was discussed. It is important to also recognise the prospect of a significant time lapse occurring between the completion of Stage 3 Developed Design and the beginning of Stage 4 Technical Design. The reasons for this sort of delay may be attributable to general economic conditions, project funding procedures, occupancy of the existing site or building, or the planning process itself. The particular reason is far less important to the smooth running of the project than the ability of the design team to present all the design information gathered and produced during Stage 3 in a style that is both easily understandable and accessible in the future. This is the role of the Information Exchange, Task Bar 7 of the Plan of Work. The completed Developed Design, collated with all relevant information for the stage, should be organised so that it can be picked up, understood and immediately built upon at the commencement of Stage 4 Technical Design.

One of the reasons that this Information Exchange needs to be comprehensive is that individuals within the design team inevitably become embedded within the design development process, and carry a lot of quick-access knowledge about the project while working on it. Over the course of the time delay between stages, project staff may have changed projects within a practice, changed employment or otherwise be unavailable to use their retained knowledge to assist at the start-up of the subsequent stage. If they are still employed at the same practice, it may, of course, be possible to elicit some knowledge from an internal, discreet ‘handover’ meeting. However, this opportunity should not be relied upon, and in any case the written documentation made at the time of completion is going to be more reliable than the recall of individuals.

A good way of achieving this aim is to ensure that the stage completion information fits the following criteria:

• A narrative that illustrates the original conceptual intention, in order to avoid misinterpretation or loss of the Concept Design.
• Clearly drawn or modelled information with key dimensional data displayed. Each design team member will have the following information as a minimum:
  • ~ Architect – site layout; dimensioned plans, sections and elevations; some relevant larger-scale details to illustrate design intent; specification notes for all works.
  • ~ Structural engineer – structural grid and structural member sizes, foundation type and layout, underground drainage layout, specification notes for all works.
  • ~ Building services engineer – plant room layouts; distribution routes, sizes and equipment; heat and lighting layouts; ‘Part L’ energy-use model and calculations; specification notes for all works.
  • ~ Landscape architect – site layout, planting schedule, specification notes for all works.

• A BIM project should include a coordinated model with all the above integrated into a single model.
• Updated Project Execution Plan and Project Strategies.
• Cost Information related to the outline specifications above.
• A Project Programme demonstrating how time has been allocated to future Plan of Work stages.
• If necessary due to a break in programme, an explanatory narrative illustrating how final design decisions were arrived at, in order to avoid loss of project knowledge from any personnel change.
• An easily referred-to log of final decisions in the Project Strategies.

The Information Exchanges at stage completions require the discipline of design team members in order to provide good-quality Project Information in a timely and presentable manner. At Stage 3, this involves developing the project with well-considered and reviewed strategies; a fully coordinated design, with researched and confirmed Cost Information; and having a mechanism, as part of the Project Execution Plan, to allow a check against the Initial Project Brief. This should result in a successful project delivering excellent design standards.

As at Stage 2, the project team should consider the requirements of a UK Government Information Exchange if it is relevant for the project.

What Should be in the Information Exchange: at the end of Stage 3?

As just described, when the tasks in a stage are completed the design team prepares an Information Exchange for handing to the next stage. At Stage 3, this is a particularly important point in the project when the overall design ‘feels’ complete. The client signs off the design so that a planning application or tender process can commence. The Information Exchange at the end of Stage 3 Developed Design should include the following:

• Design information from all design team members. As noted earlier, this might include appropriately scaled and dimensioned plan, section and elevation drawings; photomontage illustrations; 3D electronic and physical models; a document detailing the site analysis, context and design constraints; and an appropriate level of specification detail relevant to the procurement route. The level of detail in a BIM environment should be sufficient to allow full coordination between architecture, structure and building services:
  • ~ establish main site and finished floor levels in relation to existing site levels
  • ~ detail main structural grid and principal plan and section structural dimensions
  • ~ detail main plant and equipment room requirements
  • ~ detail main service zones and distribution routes and how interface with structure is working
  • ~ detail building services external envelope penetrations
  • ~ detail main external wall and roof build ups
  • ~ detail all internal wall, floor and ceiling types and finishes
  • ~ detail door and window openings
  • ~ detail main external works elements.

The coordinated design must be reflected in the Cost Information.

• The procurement strategy. The procurement route will be determined and embedded in programme information, and reflected in the Project Execution Plan. The procurement strategy will detail the information relevant to the chosen route, and this will form part of the Stage 3 Information Exchange.
• A Project Programme, showing the time period allowed for the remaining stages of the project.
• A Design Programme coordinated with the Project Programme, showing the proposed sequence and level of detail required during Stage 4 Technical Design.
• The Project Budget. This should include a construction cost plan and be clear about what is included and what is not. The cost and design must be aligned.
• Planning information: Details of the planning submission and a status report. Planning permission may be a prerequisite to starting Stage 4.
• Health and safety implications. These will have been considered, risks mitigated where possible by the design team, and a residual risk register prepared.
• All Project Strategy documents. These key strategies will cover Sustainability, Maintenance and Operation, Handover, Construction and Health and Safety.
• The Project Execution Plan will have been updated, and Change Control Procedures will be in use.

If during Stage 3, or earlier in some projects, it becomes a requirement to complete the building as fast as possible, the design team must immediately consider what the impacts on Information Exchanges are likely to be. As in our Scenario E, it is possible to conceive a Project Programme that overlaps the end of one stage with the start of the next. Additional diligence is required in progressing from Stage 3 to Stage 4 without a fully resolved design, as this increases the risk of coordination issues arising before or during the construction stage. Using the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 as a tool for mapping the sequence of tasks, even if overlapping, will promote good project management in this pressured situation.

Scenario Summaries

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR PROJECTS BY THE END OF STAGE 3?