FIG 15.0 (chapter opener) CLT and mass timber are commonly adopted (and expressed to reflect corporate priorities) by high profile commercial clients. Sky’s Believe in Better Building, London (by Arup Associates, 2014) was completed in record time due to early team and contractor collaboration. More so than aspects discussed in preceding chapters, this chapter outlines matters of particular interest to clients and their advisors (and therefore those working with them) that will be regarded differently depending upon the type of client, sector, scale of project, location, form of investment or development or particular moments in time. The only constant is change, it seems, as perception and priorities continue to evolve and shift, often with surprising speed. Clients and developers know better than anyone involved that delivering any development can be extremely challenging and developments that innovate and endure and offer long-term value are certainly no easier. Many are rightly cautious, particularly when it comes to resolving issues around fire safety, acoustics and durability and the priority should of course be to deliver buildings that are safe, comfortable and endure. Concerns may also extend to contractors’ relative inexperience and the potential for this to limit the numbers of interested/able parties at tender stage, adding further pressure to costs. In some instances, CLT will be an appropriate material to consider and in others it may not be. Clients and teams may need work together, taking time to carefully consider options, communicate key issues or listen and evaluate appropriately rather than defaulting to the established way of doing things. A comparative approach is typically adopted, allowing favoured options to be identified and investigated further. FIG 15.1 Simplified visual summary of a comparative exercise considering the differing impacts of various forms of slab construction and grid spacing (headline indicative figures shown with and without accounting for carbon sequestration). In periods of uncertainty and potential change it is even more important to maintain options and retain flexibility where possible. Whilst maximum benefits are typically achieved when CLT use is designed-in from the outset, it is in few parties’ interests to preclude particular actions (whether that be insisting on CLT use or ruling it out) until sufficient investigations have been undertaken to make the best decisions. A key constraint is often time. Project experience suggests that decisions around structural materials are often made early in the process, while resources are limited and perhaps before a full team is engaged. Fledgling teams exploring any approach that is not widely adopted will rightly be asked to justify design direction or materials choices, typically responding to specific technical issues, at short notice. As such, undertaking early research into CLT use may help understand whether it offers value to a project and this is a great opportunity to explore projects in other regions and countries where experience may vary.1 Engaging specialists can also be important – seeking out parties with relevant experience, engaging the supply chain in a meaningful way and bringing them to the project in any way possible early on will also inform better decision making. Whatever material is under consideration, one of the most common questions posed when considering relatively new forms of building or construction is ‘show me examples where it’s been done before’. Since many of the buildings completed with CLT to date have been developed by innovators and early adopters, such leading edge individuals and organisations are typically minded to share lessons learnt to benefit the early majority and those following afterwards. Seek out relevant precedents and contact those involved to learn more.
CHAPTER 15
CLIENT ISSUES
THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
Investigating potential options
Pressured decision making
Existing precedents