OVER-SPECIFIED AND UNDER-USED

Over-specification has dogged UK buildings for years, especially in the high quality office market. Over-specification tends to rise when there is a boom. Estate agents and some developers cram buildings with 'toys' to help sell them and cover the requirements of as many clients as possible. This has often led to inappropriate fixtures and fittings being ripped out when an occupier moves in.

Although some developers such as Stanhope have been saying office specifications should be reduced, it is probably the severity of the recession that has brought the message home. The trend has been aided by the publication in July 1994 of new guidelines for urban office specification by the British Council of Offices.

Greycoat's Chris Strickland, who chaired the BCO working party, is pleased with the reaction to the guidelines so far. 'There was an initial flurry when the document came out and then I got a bit worried as it seemed to sink without a trace. But I discovered by talking to a range of people that the guidelines are being used as a benchmark either to compare with or actually adopt. This is significant as the office development cycle is beginning again.'

Graham Matthews, project services director at the British Airports Authority said: 'The industry is slow to move. It needs to be challenged and the BCO guidelines do this. Specification is about what is appropriate. Sometimes you have to put in the best, but you don't need carpet on fire escapes. Reducing the spec is not about cutting corners, it's about cutting out waste and unnecessary cost.'

The BCO guidelines recommend that buildings should only be fitted to shell and core unless there is a pre-let, thereby avoiding refits when the first occupier wants to change the spec design. A more realistic estimate of occupancy levels is also needed. A 1993 study by Stanhope showed that many offices are designed to cope with 60% more staff than actually occupy the building.

Buildings were found to have an unnecessary number of lifts, toilets and escape routes for the number of people in occupation. The cellular office culture demanded a lot of internal partitioning, but the move towards an open plan culture is also reducing the need for this.

G&T's Colin Stoker said: 'There may be a need to question how we calculate some of our specifications. Do all workers turn up at the office within the space of five minutes? Do people work a strict nine to five? I doubt it and therefore do you need as many lifts for example. There is some resistance in the market to dropping from one person per 14m2 to one per 10m2 - as people want a safety net to catch all occupants.'

One area that is still much discussed is floor loadings.

UK offices still set floor loadings at 4(+1)kN/m2, when they could be safely set at 2.5(+1)kN/m2. But Stoker suggests that a thinner beam or column might have to be used to make any real saving.

But Strickland points out that you can still save by reducing the density of beams and columns and also designing the piles to support a reduced loading. 'The institutions are still concerned in terms of perception - they feel it is a risk they don't need to take. But it isn't a risk and if you reduce floor loadings to 2.5kN/m2 you get a 3% saving.'

Studies have also shown that lighting, small power and heating and ventilation systems are also over-specified. Air-conditioning is still a controversial area, as advocates of naturally ventilated buildings know only too well. Strickland said: 'There isn't the body of evidence from naturally ventilated buildings yet to be able to see how good they are. You can only have a certain depth of building with natural ventilation and it isn't suited to urban centres.'

Stoker agrees: 'There is a nervousness to change to alternatives such as chilled ceilings and beams. They are very efficient and have very low maintenance costs, but may be a capital cost to pay. As regards traditional air-con, there is no doubt that it needs to become more appropriate to the occupier's actual needs. Cooling systems have been designed way over actual requirements.'

Stoker believes that the way ahead lies in schemes with simpler concepts and more built in flexibility.

'With shorter leases these days buildings need to be flexible to future adaption by a new tenant. This means we need simplicity in the base scheme - if specialist areas are required, they need good access to basement or roof plant areas. The evidence is that this is starting to happen.'