Feature articles October 2007

Government should lead the way on modern methods of construction!
By: The Association for Specialist Fire Protection (ASFP)
Government should lead the way on modern methods of construction! Modern buildings are constructed by a variety of methods and it is worthwhile understanding the different types of construction techniques as this gives an indication of where the main control lies with regard to the selection and installation of fire protection systems.
The traditional designer led process sees the client or developer appoint an architect in the early stages of the project to seek planning consent for the building and produce designs and specifications according to the regulations and the client needs. For anything more than simple designs, the architectural team will seek assistance from specialists such as structural or environmental engineers and quantity surveyors, to produce a ‘Bill of Quantities’ and specification for the project. The next stage in this process is for construction companies to tender for the work and be appointed as the ‘Main Contractor’. Specialist sub-contractors will be sought for ‘packages’ of work and during construction the whole project will be supervised by the design team, led by the architect, who has the overall responsibility for ensuring that the building satisfies the brief originally agreed with the client. Thus, in this case the client and the architect have the majority of the control over the type of fire protection chosen and over the applicators that are selected for its installation.
The second construction option is the management contracting process system. This differs from the traditional approach, principally in that the management contractor/construction manager (who takes responsibility for delivering the construction of the project) is brought into the process at a much earlier stage, as are key specialists. This type of procurement is most commonly used for complex or fast track projects, where risks tend to be high. Some design responsibility may be included in the arrangement. Thus, here we see a partial flow of control from the client and architect to the constructor.
The third option, for the construction of a ‘modern building’, is design and build. Under this option, a client will offer the basic concept, or a brief, to construction companies who will undertake (with their own design team) to deliver the completed building largely to performance based requirements. The design and construction will be the contractor’s responsibility and he will deliver a building to meet the client’s needs. Competition will have been between companies offering a variety of design solutions to meet these needs and the client will have to select the contractor whose ideas most closely fit his requirements, both conceptually and financially. This system sees the contractor responsible for designing all aspects of the project, to meet the performance requirements of the client, within the agreed budget. Under this option, the client and architect will have ‘surrendered’ most of the control over the type of fire protection chosen and over the applicators that are selected for its installation.
Finally, we have ‘Public Private Partnerships’ (PPP) and the ‘Private Finance Initiative’ (PFI). Recent governments have been committed to partnerships with the private sector to deliver modern and effective public services. Partnerships are intended to enable the public sector to benefit from commercial dynamism, innovation and efficiencies, by harnessing private sector capital, skills and experience, with the high standards and commitment found within the public services. PPPs place risks with the party best placed to manage them. The private sector partner puts its own capital at risk, encouraging innovation and the effective management of risks, which helps to deliver projects on time and on budget through the lifetime of the project. PPPs are intended to offer better services, delivered more efficiently and thus, providing better value for money for the taxpayer.
PPPs are not a single model applied to every circumstance, but rather offer a tailored approach to the particular circumstances of public services. The PFI has been the main vehicle for delivering successful PPPs. PFI projects can only go ahead where they demonstrate clear value for money against a ‘traditional’ procurement. This involves a comparison between the PFI proposal and a Public Sector Comparator, which estimates the costs of a ‘traditional’ procurement in which separate arrangements will exist for the construction, maintenance and operation of a service. Within the concept of the PFI, government departments and local authorities seek companies who will provide a building at their own expense. The cost will be met by the main contractor drawing funds from either the users, or the authority, for the use of the facility over an agreed period of time. In this way it is intended that the original design will meet the requirements of the client in functional terms, but will also have to be capable of being maintained over a long period (within projected income limits) if the main contractor is to meet his cost and profit objectives, from the construction and use of the facility, over the agreed period. Again, here the client and architect will have ‘surrendered’ most of the control over the type of fire protection chosen and over the applicators that are selected for its installation.
So what are the ramifications for the quality of the fire protection systems that are installed under these various construction methods?
Well, in an ideal world, all of these construction techniques would lead to the most appropriate systems being correctly installed and maintained. We don’t live, however, in an ideal world! We live in one where the onus for evaluating the fire risk lies with the Responsible Person for the building and in the first instance, this is likely to be an employee of the client that takes control of the building. Of course, if the building is a speculative development then the Responsible Person will not be known at the time of construction.
Under the traditional designer led construction process, the responsibility for the fire protection systems lay with the client and their architect and given this ‘ownership’ the onus, in the opinion of the Association for Specialist Fire Protection (ASFP), is more likely to lay at the quality end of the spectrum with regard to the choice of products and their installation contractors.
The management contracting construction process sees the client and their architect ‘loosen’ their control over the design and the construction of the building and with design and build, this ‘loosening’ can be further extended. In the experience of the ASFP this can lead to the appointed constructor putting pressure on the fire protection sub-contractor to ‘cheapen’ up their bid by using lower grade products and/or by using lower cost (equates to less experienced!) labour.
All of this possible downgrading of the quality of the installed fire protection can be avoided. Simply put, the client for the building should insist that the products to be installed be listed in a document that is referenced as a source of information in Approved Document B and that the installers be third party certificated and members of a trade association with an enforceable code of practice.
But we haven’t discussed PPP/PFI. Well, the same recommendation in the above paragraph still stands, but here we expect the Government to follow its own advice as well, as members from the DTI, CLG and the OGC are members of the Strategic Forum for Construction (SFC). In the SFC report ‘Accelerating Change’, which followed on from the earlier report ‘Rethinking Construction’ from the Construction Task Force, the SFC sets out its vision ‘for the UK construction industry to realise maximum value for all clients, end-users and stakeholders and exceed their expectations through the consistent delivery of world-class products and services’.
Following on from its vision statement in the Accelerating Change report, the Strategic Forum set two strategic targets. The first target was that, by the end of 2004, 20% of construction projects, by value, should be undertaken by integrated teams and supply chains and 20% of client activity, by value, should embrace the principles of the Clients’ Charter. The Confederation of Construction Clients in response to ‘Rethinking Construction’ established the latter. The charter is designed to meet the minimum standards that they expect in construction procurement today, their aspirations for the future and it includes a programme of increasingly demanding targets to drive up standards. By the end of 2007, both these figures should rise to 50%.
Currently, in its sector, the ASFP sees little or no evidence that these targets are being taken seriously. Given that 60-70% of commercial construction has Government money involved, shouldn’t the Government be leading the way when it comes to best practice in the construction of buildings? Shouldn’t it take the advice of the DTI, CLG and the OGC when it comes to construction techniques?
In the ASFP’s opinion, this best practice for fire protection includes the use of integrated knowledgeable teams that use listed products that are installed by companies that are third party certificated and members of a trade association with an enforceable code of practice. Nothing less is acceptable if we are to have the safest buildings possible.

Counting the cost of new business
• UK property businesses spend over £982 million a month on business to business sales and marketing
• UK property companies rely on new business for, on average, over 29% of turnover
• Each new customer won costs property companies £501 in marketing alone
• ‘Customer intimacy’ gap identified in sales and marketing
New research published recently by Marketsafe, the business sales and marketing information experts, reveals UK property businesses spend an average of £11,430 each per year on their business-to-business sales and marketing. With nearly a quarter (23%) of companies in the UK expecting new business-to-business customer acquisitions to account for at least half of their annual turnover over the next 12 months, it’s hardly surprising property companies are prepared to devote so much money to this type of marketing activity.
However, Marketsafe has identified a worrying ‘customer intimacy’ gap where firms waste their sale and marketing spend by failing to adequately investigate and qualify potential new business opportunities. Despite the pressures on their time and money, many companies still do not do their homework before approaching a new business target. Less than half (43%) go to the customer’s web site before contacting them and a similar proportion don’t check who is the most appropriate person to approach. Shockingly, 16 per cent of respondents confess to conducting no research whatsoever into a prospective business customer before approaching them.
The amount of money spent on sales and marketing varies considerably depending on the size of the business with small ‘one man bands’ spending around £1,100 compared to large companies which spend an average of £119,000 per year. Each new business client won by property companies in the UK costs an average of £501 in sales and marketing activity alone, compared to £472 nationally.
The research reveals the obstacles companies face when attempting to attract new business customers. More than one in three companies blame a lack of time (42%) and money (39%) for being unable to acquire new business. One in four (24%) feel there is too much competition for business while 13% blame the poor quality of their marketing data.
Andrew Harris, Managing Director, Marketsafe UK, said: “British businesses pour billions of pounds into their sales marketing campaigns but staggeringly many do not take the time to learn about the companies they are targeting. There is an attitude, particularly with direct marketing, to target as many businesses as possible and wait for the “two per cent” to reply.
Investing more time and money in developing ‘customer intimacy’ can help firms get more from their sales and marketing activity, maximising the value of their investment.”
Regional findings
Companies in London spend the most on their business to business sales and marketing for each piece of new business acquired, followed by businesses in Scotland. Companies in Wales and the South West spend just £109 on sales and marketing for each new business client won.
Harris continued:
“Companies utilising the prospect tracking and targeting solutions offered by marketing services providers can reduce wasted spend on sales and marketing. Too many businesses fail to effectively qualify new business leads, wasting resources trying to identify key decision makers and influencers in a business, when they could cost effectively employ marketing solutions providers to provide them with this business intelligence.”

Is your building accessible?
By Cindy Dancer, NRAC
How accessible is your building?
Is your building accessible? Are you fulfilling your obligation to ensure that your premises are accessible as an employer or a service provider?
If you are in the process of redesigning an existing building or creating a new building then this is the time to consider access issues. Even if you are not, you can still take steps to improve access. Most likely you have given some thought to people in wheelchairs since the inception of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA). However, have you considered parents with prams, elderly people, visually impaired people and deaf people? Designing or refurbishing buildings to make them suitable and convenient for disabled people is also likely to benefit large numbers of other people.
How do you go about making your building accessible for everyone? What regulations do you need to consider? As an employer or a service provider what would be considered best practice when implementing change? You may have some idea of what needs to be done but to ensure that you are carrying out best practice, you would need to employ an access consultant to carry out an audit of an existing building.
Whether you are at the planning stage of a new building or you are simply renovating an existing building, there is a national requirement that disabled people will need to be formally considered. A design and access statement should accompany all applications for planning permission and listed building consent, except for house extensions and changes of use. This statement is a short report that describes and explains the development and the approach to design and access issues. The access component of the statement needs to explain how access to and within the site will be considered for different types of users. It will also need to explain how the local community or access groups have been consulted and involved in the design process. It will also describe how inclusive design will be achieved and the principles and the approach that will be followed to ensure this.
Developers need to ensure that design and access statements are produced by suitably qualified professionals to ensure good quality of design, which is more likely to obtain planning permission. Access consultants will be invaluable in assisting with this process. There are many people claiming to be access consultants, but just over 200 are accredited by the National Register of Access Consultants. The NRAC has stringent criteria for membership with a pass rate of around fifty percent; assessment is by submission of written work and an interview to test understanding and knowledge. NRAC accredited consultants are able to provide informed, reliable advice on the provision and maintenance of inclusive environments in the context of the following: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and 2005, Approved Document Part M, 2004 (AD M), Access to and Use of Buildings and BS 8300:2001 (amended in 2005) Design of Buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people, Approved Document B, 2006 (AD B) Fire Safety. That is not to say that those who are not registered are not fully qualified to give advice, but that there are no guarantees as to the quality or provision of that advice. The NRAC is still actively encouraging highly skilled consultants to join the register in order to make it easier for clients to select the most suitable consultant for their needs.
To find an NRAC member in your area, refer to the NRAC online database at http://www.nrac.org.uk
email info@nrac.org.uk or telephone the NRAC on RNID Typetalk - dial 1800 2020 7735 7845

Working with asbestos
By the Health & Safety Executive
Asbestos is a naturally occurring fibrous mineral that has been used commercially for about 150 years and is potentially deadly. Last year, asbestos-related disease caused by past exposure to asbestos was responsible for around 4000 deaths, making it the biggest work related killer in Great Britain.
Asbestos-related disease is caused when asbestos fibres are released from materials, become airborne and are inhaled. The fibres are microscopic and can lodge in the tissue of the lungs and stomach. The body’s natural defences do not break down the fibres, so increased or prolonged exposure causes a build up of fibres and can, depending on the level of exposure and the genetic susceptibility of the individual, result in the contraction of three diseases: mesothelioma, lung cancer or asbestosis. Asbestos is most dangerous to those exposed both to high concentrations and to lower levels over an extended period; it is these exposures that can lead to asbestos-related disease.
Asbestos was used extensively as a building material in Great Britain from the 1950s through to the mid-1980s. It was versatile, plentiful and was ideal as a fireproofing and insulation material. Although much of this material has been removed over the years it is estimated that more than half a million industrial, commercial and public sector premises, plus millions of homes, still contain some form of asbestos. These buildings all need maintenance and repair from time to time, possibly full refurbishment at some point, and eventually demolishing.
Protecting those at greatest risk
Many workers in the building and related industries have the potential to encounter asbestos during the course of their work. This includes plumbers, carpenters, electricians, gas fitters, painters, decorators, and even less obvious trades, such as heating and ventilation engineers, lift shaft engineers and computer equipment installers.
In fact, anyone who drills into or cuts or otherwise disturbs materials, or maintains plant or equipment, within a building as part of their work could unknowingly expose themselves to asbestos fibres. Potentially the effects could be deadly. Research shows that a quarter of the 4000 people currently dying from asbestos-related diseases worked in the building and maintenance trades at some point in their lives.
Exposure potential depends on the nature of the job and how it is controlled. A one-off, short-duration exposure is unlikely to result in a significant risk of developing mesothelioma, but these workers may be involved in a series of jobs, and therefore receive many short-duration exposures. Because of the current widespread presence of asbestos in buildings, it is envisaged that for the foreseeable future trades people can continue to come into contact with the material and disturb it, thereby slowly but surely increasing the risk to their health.
Regulatory Controls for Non-domestic Premises
The bringing into force of a ‘duty to manage’ asbestos by HSE in May 2004 is intended to provide a new level of protection for those within the building related trades with the aim that many thousands of lives will be saved through the effective operation of the regulation. However, it is important that maintenance and repair workers continue to remain aware of the potential of exposure to asbestos fibres, and request details of asbestos materials before starting work.
In many cases, this information will be available, but where it isn’t there will be a need for an assessment of whether asbestos is present to be undertaken before work is started, or presume that asbestos is present and work accordingly. It needs to be borne in mind that as the regulation does not apply to domestic premises, other than in common areas; it is most unlikely that there will be a prepared record of asbestos.
A key issue in protecting against exposure to asbestos is ensuring that workers have received appropriate training. Regulation 10 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 places a duty on employers to ensure that adequate information, instruction and training is given to those employees who are liable to be exposed to asbestos, or those who supervise such employees. The level of detail and the range of topics covered are specified in the regulations and need to be relevant to the job, together with the potential or actual risk of exposure to asbestos.
Those liable to be exposed to asbestos must be aware of:
The significant findings of the risk assessment
The risks to health from asbestos,
The precautions which should be observed, and
The relevant control limit

Facilities Management, Property and Estate Management, Health & Safety, Security, Access Control