Win-Win Building Design Case Study
The business case described here is a win-win situation for all parties involved. It is a genuine case and happened from 2022-06 to 2023-02. The background is the design process for a new building to be constructed. The writer is a Compucon project director in digital technology applications. The reasons to undertake this building construction project management (or being accepted to undertake) were the offer of free design for digitalization of the building and a good track record of project management. This case study was written in a layman language and should be easy for all readers to appreciate the applied management philosophies, to share the joy of win-win success, and to obtain reflections for personal use. Since the project described is current and commercially sensitive, all names are not mentioned other than the place of occurrence being Auckland.
Resource Consent was obtained by the developer in 2022-03 for 1040 sqm of residential spaces including a café and off-street carparking. The next step of the project is Developed Design during which the architect will finetune the approved Resource Consent design to include features outside the scope of Resource Consent. An unforeseen event emerged. The design was found to incur a ‘load-support-transfer structure' which would push up the construction cost. The total cost of development was estimated to exceed the market price of the building when completed. In the meantime, Covid hit our architect firm hard to the extent that the architect could not continue to work on this project. The writer was brought in to advise the best way forward in terms of cost, timing, and quality of the project. The writer was happy to jump in with the confidence that proper efforts would improve things.
The writer advised to reduce the number of terraced houses on the podium by one. This reduction would eliminate the ‘load-support-transfer structure’ problem. The writer also advised to turn the top level of penthouses to standard ensuites in order to increase the market price of the building. The cost reduction and price increase should help but may not be enough to guarantee a turnaround.
We talked to several new architects about options and ran into one who attempted to push the envelope within the limits of the Council. The subsequent efforts did succeed to add more ceiling heights and floor areas to all residential units. It is a process of rationalization.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Happiness did not stop there. The writer convinced the town planner that the latest design stayed within the terms of the Council as given in the previous Consent approval. Instead of submitting a full application for Resource Consent to account for all the changes made, we submitted a Consent Variation application.
Variation approval was obtained in 2023-02 from the Council. All parties involved were very happy especially the developer and the architect. The writer further
believed that the rationalization approach should lead to reduced Developed Design efforts.
Why should readers of this article be happy too? The fact that the writer is neither an architect nor a town planner was able to manage the above process successfully implies that all readers can be in the same position if not already there. The happiness can apply to all sorts of projects including but not exclusively building construction. Feel free to discuss or ask for more information.
A classic example that everything needs a third person with clear mind to look at, review and input feedback on the problems that happen all the time from design to construction stage. In your example the problem is the designer not picking the requirement of the ‘load-support-transfer structure’ at the resource consent stage. Credit to you with innovation and brave thinking to alter the design, to the developer able to compromise and to the council of being able to work with the developer and their design team to resolve this major change to the approved resource consent. Happy ending to everyone and huge congratulation to you TN.
A light shining through the grey mist. Well done TN. Very well done.
It's old but true cliche: “Few make it happen, some watch it happen, but most ask, “What happened?”. Movers and shakers are born, not made. They are intrinsically talented and can’t help performing that way. Career labels and qualifications are typically corporate strategies used to pigeon hole the vast majority safely “inside the corporate dogma box” to prevent them from thinking “outside the square”. But altruistic movers and shakers mostly operate "outside the square" and of necessity, independently. That’s why they succeed where most can’t.
What makes anyone think Council authorities know what they are doing? In my experience they are box tickers. Anything outside the box puts them in a panic. They excel in saying NO but are very reluctant to say Yes even when the controlling legislation says they must! Innovation and creativity are unknown whilst an engineers report is the preferred solution to everything. That said, if you know your rights and the controlling legislation and their obligations any one can succeed. After all they are there to serve us, not vice versa. Well done TN.