Learning Environments 2013: Mike Clark

282 views
178 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
282
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Learning Environments 2013: Mike Clark

  1. 1. Design and Management of Learning Environments 18th June 2013 Post-occupancy evaluation studies at the University of Brighton – our recent experience Mike Clark Director of Estate & Facilities Management, The University of Brighton
  2. 2. The University of Brighton – Facts and figures RegionalLocation Eastbourne Brighton Hastings
  3. 3. Why POE?  It’s about how people and buildings accommodate each other over time  It’s about part of a whole life approach to buildings, enabling those who procure, deliver, manage and use buildings to see their engagement with buildings as addressing both process and product  It’s about addressing sustainability in its widest sense - the on-going capacity of buildings to accommodate change, be environmentally responsible and deliver value; but:  It’s also about learning from the past to shape the future www.softlandings.org.uk
  4. 4. Why POE – Whole life considerations CABE – The Impact of Office Design on Business Performance – May 2005
  5. 5. Brief and timeframe  We wanted to encourage continuous learning from our projects  Foster a culture of feedback from our supply chain  Use the feedback to manage and improve the operational side of the estates department  To work within the guidelines set out in the HEFCE/AUDE guide to Post Occupancy Evaluation studies  To provide a methodology to engage with stakeholders  Start date: Aug 2011; Finish date: Feb 2012
  6. 6. Checkland Building – Opened September 2009
  7. 7. Checkland Building
  8. 8. Checkland Building
  9. 9. Checkland Building
  10. 10. Checkland Building – Floor plans Level 1 Level 3 Level 5
  11. 11. Falmer Sports Centre – Opened October 2010
  12. 12. Falmer Sports Centre
  13. 13. Falmer Sports Centre
  14. 14. Falmer Sports Centre – Floor plans Ground Floor First Floor
  15. 15. Huxley Building Opened June 2010
  16. 16. Huxley Building
  17. 17. Huxley Building
  18. 18. Huxley Building – Floor plans Ground Level -1 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
  19. 19. Project methodology Stage 1 – Identify key issues  Building familiarisation  Survey to all staff 255 respondents Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis  User experience workshop 12 participants  Estates workshop 11 participants  Project process interviews 22 interviews Stage 3 – Findings & recommendations  For future projects and the buildings reviewed
  20. 20. Stage 1 – Identify key issues  Understanding project aspirations  Clarifying expectations  Confirming scope  Assigning roles and responsibilities Survey to all staff  Things that worked well (and not so well!)  Complete the sentences….. • Functionally this building…. • Socially, aesthetically, environmentally, symbolically  Actions to enhance user experience
  21. 21. Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis User experience workshop  Project awareness • UoB vision • Project processes  User requirements • Establishing high-level requirements (design concept) • Establishing detailed requirements (design development)  Relocating • Preparing; moving; settling  Adjusting • Organisational changes • Building changes
  22. 22. Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis Estates workshop  Pre-contract • How were end user requirements established? • To what extent did E&FM influence the user brief?  Post-contract • How were the different technical briefs developed? • Were there any key changes made during design development?  Handover • From contractor to E&FM and from E&FM to end users  Building in use • What about the on-going operational issues raised?
  23. 23. Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis Project process interviews  Client governance  Project brief development  Procurement route  Design Process  Construction phases  Building handover  Occupation
  24. 24. Stage 3 – Findings and recommendations  Improved accommodation provided via 3 new buildings  All 3 buildings completed on time  BREEAM ratings are ‘Very Good’/’Excellent’  Some user expectations have been unevenly met  In some respects, not well served by design & build  Good ‘move-in’ support from E&FM  Building handover process dragged on for too long But:
  25. 25. Lessons in Procurement?  On reflection, the design and build process left insufficient control with the university  Time and budget prioritised over content and quality  Projects tendered too early – RIBA Stage D (+/-) • Employer’s requirements generally under-developed • Insufficient control over mechanical, electrical, plumbing services and commissioning  Handover at RIBA Stage D is common, but: • Design information tends to be related to planning requirements • User requirements and base-build/fit-out criteria may not be fully identified • Technical specifications are unlikely to be detailed or co-ordinated
  26. 26. The role of governance
  27. 27. Feedback from staff  Communication|Communication|Communication  Ask questions and keep on asking……!  Need to understand project governance, user engagement process and project timescales  Have your input in to the project officially recognised  Task design and technical teams with highlighting the issues users may not pick up  Request a range of communications tools  Help users understand that the project is about balancing a wide and sometimes conflicting range of needs
  28. 28. Available for all UoB staff to see!
  29. 29. Looking ahead - the Cockcroft Building + future projects
  30. 30. Looking ahead - the Cockcroft Building + future projects
  31. 31. Looking ahead - the Cockcroft Building + future projects
  32. 32. Looking ahead - the Cockcroft Building + future projects
  33. 33. Looking ahead - the Cockcroft Building + future projects
  34. 34. Cockcroft Building  Capital Projects Advisory Group/SMT  Project Board  Delivery Team  Project Steering Group  User Group  Technical & Operational sub- group  ICT Sub-group  Pooled spaces sub- group  Marketing & Comms sub-group  Admin spaces sub- group
  35. 35. Cockcroft Building
  36. 36. Cockcroft Building – Room data sheets
  37. 37. Cockcroft Building
  38. 38. Lots of guidance out there!
  39. 39. Informing the estate strategy  Distinct identity and relationship to its physical context and community  Welcoming, permeable and accessible.  Clear and visible reception point  Student support services with front-line service desk  Flexible spaces that include informal learning and social spaces  Dedicated spaces for research and postgraduate study  Sustainable technology and space planning.  Increase in student residential accommodation
  40. 40. Carly West and Tom Munson The SILS experience

×