Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Design and Management of
Learning Environments
18th June 2013
Post-occupancy evaluation studies at the
University of Brigh...
The University of Brighton –
Facts and figures
RegionalLocation
Eastbourne
Brighton
Hastings
Why POE?
 It’s about how people and buildings accommodate each
other over time
 It’s about part of a whole life approach...
Why POE –
Whole life considerations
CABE – The Impact of Office Design on Business Performance – May 2005
Brief and timeframe
 We wanted to encourage continuous learning from our
projects
 Foster a culture of feedback from our...
Checkland Building –
Opened September 2009
Checkland Building
Checkland Building
Checkland Building
Checkland Building – Floor plans
Level 1 Level 3 Level 5
Falmer Sports Centre –
Opened October 2010
Falmer Sports Centre
Falmer Sports Centre
Falmer Sports Centre – Floor plans
Ground Floor First Floor
Huxley Building
Opened June 2010
Huxley Building
Huxley Building
Huxley Building – Floor plans
Ground
Level -1
Level 1 Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Project methodology
Stage 1 – Identify key issues
 Building familiarisation
 Survey to all staff 255 respondents
Stage 2...
Stage 1 – Identify key issues
 Understanding project aspirations
 Clarifying expectations
 Confirming scope
 Assigning...
Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis
User experience workshop
 Project awareness
• UoB vision
• Project processes
 Use...
Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis
Estates workshop
 Pre-contract
• How were end user requirements established?
• To ...
Stage 2 – Data collection and analysis
Project process interviews
 Client governance
 Project brief development
 Procur...
Stage 3 –
Findings and recommendations
 Improved accommodation provided via 3 new buildings
 All 3 buildings completed o...
Lessons in Procurement?
 On reflection, the design and build process left insufficient
control with the university
 Time...
The role of governance
Feedback from staff
 Communication|Communication|Communication
 Ask questions and keep on asking……!
 Need to understand...
Available for all UoB staff to see!
Looking ahead - the Cockcroft
Building + future projects
Looking ahead - the Cockcroft
Building + future projects
Looking ahead - the Cockcroft
Building + future projects
Looking ahead - the Cockcroft
Building + future projects
Looking ahead - the Cockcroft
Building + future projects
Cockcroft Building
 Capital Projects
Advisory
Group/SMT
 Project Board
 Delivery Team
 Project Steering
Group
 User G...
Cockcroft Building
Cockcroft Building –
Room data sheets
Cockcroft Building
Lots of guidance out there!
Informing the estate strategy
 Distinct identity and relationship to its physical context
and community
 Welcoming, perm...
Carly West and Tom Munson
The SILS experience
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Learning Environments 2013: Mike Clark

512 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

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

×