A Study on the role of POE in the RIBA Plan of Work.
Can Post Occupancy Evaluation be conceived as an essential tool in the life-cycle of a building?
Preface
Buildings and construction industry are responsible for 42% of the UK’s total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These emissions arise from three stages of a building’s life cycle — when built, its daily emissions and its demolition. Replying to the climate crisis, The Royal Institute of British Architect (RIBA) set a target of Net Zero carbon emissions in new and retro-fitted buildings by 2030.
Replying to the climate crisis, The Royal Institute of British Architect (RIBA) set a target of Net Zero carbon emissions in new and retrofitted buildings by 2030.
Moreover, new models and campaigns emerged in retrofit, re-use and creating solutions to reduce energy consumption by stimulating a circular economy. As explained by Will Hurst, in 2019, in the Introduction of RetroFirst: ‘emissions are a symptom of consumption and, unless we reduce consumption, we’ll not reduce emissions.’ (Hurst, 2019)
Inspired by platforms as Rotor and CO-OP, 0.WASTE.LAND provides a user-friendly interface which helps facilitate the material reuse and recovery strategy. Its mission is to contribute to a systemic transition to a circular construction sector.
As Rotor and CO-OP, 0.WASTE.LAND provides a user-friendly interface which helps facilitate the material re-use and recovery strategy. Its mission is to contribute to a systemic transition to a circular construction sector. By critically reflecting on the broad vision and first stages of the 0.WASTE.LAND platform, this paper wants to unveil existing policies in a broader spectrum. As Will Hurst states: we must think re-use first, new build second. In campaigning the re-use of waste materials, in a bigger scale, 0.WASTE.LAND should promote a retrofit campaign. ‘One reason construction consumes so much is because based on a wasteful economic model which often involves tearing down existing structures and buildings, haphazardly disposing of the resulting material, and rebuilding from scratch.’(Hurst, 2019)
As explained by Hurst, it is fundamental that the conception and appraisal of re-use in a small scale also compromises the bigger scale. So how might the introduction of a survey within the platform. Can 0.WASTE.LAND promote re-use throughout the life-cycle and in-use phase of a building? Suppose POE (Post-occupancy evaluation) becomes a mandatory element within RIBA Plan Of Work. How would the stages of work revalue ‘Phase Stage 7’ and sees a building as an Ongoing-construction model rather than a process ending in demolition? By explicitly outlining POE as a mediator tool for both client’s and architect’s, the research wants to studies the non-mandatory construction evaluation as a future, yet existing service, that could enhance the thoughtful construction process’s needs 2021.
History and Background of POE (Post-Occupancy Evaluation)
In the UK, the design profession has not fully appreciated the significance of returning to the erected structure to appraise how well it was, and remained, fit for purpose. (Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019)
Consequently, great attention is placed in re-evaluating existing structures, especially during 2019 and 2020. Ass Outline in the RIBA Plan of Work, its importance has been outlined in the In-use phase over Stage 6 and 7. Here, a PEO service (Post Occupancy Evaluation) set to critically optimise the in-use performance for both the client and environment. POE described as ‘any and all activities that originate out of an interest in learning how a building performs once it is built, including whether and how well it has met expectations and how satisfied building users are with the environment that has been created.’ (Vischer, J., 2002, p. 23)
POE set its roots in the UK in the 1965 RIBA’s Plan of Work where client opinion on the building was necessary. Underused and undervalued it was chosen to be removed in 1972.
STAGE M, also renamed ‘Feedback’, required that architects revisit their design work after it had been constructed and occupied for 2–3 years. (Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019) Composed by walk-through surveys, spot checks using hand-held instruments, and informal discussions with occupants and management, Stage M was used only for major studies of offices in the 1980s and in the 1990s. More recently, RIBA introduced the explicit possibility of POE in the revised version of its handbook, under Plan of Work, Stage 6–7. ‘POE is presented as a tool to improve the quality of buildings and the users’ need and expectations.’ (Clements, D. 2014.)’However, business and market pressures do not simply permit designers and builders to be interested in a building’s performance after handover, as they move on to the next project.’ (Way and Bordass, 2005) Consequently, after more than half a century since its first introduction by RIBA, POE is still a scanty endeavour of research-oriented academics, rather than being an embedded practice in the building procurement process in the UK. ‘When implemented for a newly developed facility, POE can accrue various benefits in terms of: maximising space utilisation, reducing operational costs and optimising maintenance costs.’ (Edwards, D., Garcia, M., Hosseini, R., Roberts, C., 2019) So what would happen if POE would become a mandatory service for all the projects? What are the restrictions and possibilities of this element within RIBA’s outlines?
POE Use within RIBA Plan of Work and a new approach within 0.WASTE.LAND.
‘Despite fifty years of subsequent development, the vast majority of discourse on POE planning and implementation is generated via higher education institutions’ real estate departments and not routinely applied throughout the wider AECO sector.’ (Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019)
No incentives are used for designers, developers, owners, and occupants to take ownership of the POE, as an inherent part of the building procurement process. All these factors might have contributed to the lack of engagement and use within the UK building procurement industry. Moreover, POE is a collection of diverse elements, and for this reason, it considers a broad range of performance metrics including building use, energy consumption, maintenance costs and user satisfaction. As in a building’s operational performance, various metrics are take in consideration:
Project team feedback that recounts the commissioning and construction phases.
The end-user feedback.
The technical performance feedback from a building’s systems.
A strategic overview was incorporating the data from each stage.
Diverse Actors, informations and modelling are fundamental and often, hard to interpret.
Nowadays, as cited in the Plan for Use Guide, RIBA identifies a graduated approach to POE from:
‘Level 1 — Light Touch Review. Rapid feedback on performance and occupant satisfaction and to identify opportunities for fine-tuning. With the assistance of other design and building team members, the Architect will ideally do this during RIBA Stage 6 (also called Handover), by the end of the 12-month defects period.
Level 2- Diagnostic Assessment, generally by independent evaluators during Year 2 of occupation, to verify performance and review any issues discovered, including those identified at Level 1.
Level 3- Detailed (Forensic) Investigations, if necessary by independent evaluators, identify and resolve any significant and persistent performance issues. Building Performance Evaluation methods available for use in POE cover a wide range of outcomes and metrics. The CIBSE TM22 energy assessment method and the BUS Methodology occupant satisfaction survey.’(Riba,2020)
While RIBA represents this process along stage 6–7 of the built environment design process as a cyclical life, it is clear that they intend to showcase an ongoing process rather than initiated and concluded according to the specific building’s design. However, to reinforce a cyclical process, POE is a showcase as a sort of ‘logical final step’, providing a basis of a ‘lessons learned’ process, future-forward developments. Interestingly, Leaman and Bordass in 2001, quoted by Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C. in 2019 in A critique of post‑occupancy evaluation in the UK, introduce the concept of ‘virtuous circles of improvement’ where POE implements as a benchmarking strategy throughout the design phase. ‘This approach fosters a dynamic, continually evolving model to engender continuous improvement throughout the design and construction phases instead of a final feedback at the Handover.’ (Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019)
New Decisions for 0.WASTE.LAND
‘Despite the known benefits of POE, the culture of evaluating a building’s performance, after it has been built and occupied has not embedded.’ (Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019)The importance of existing building surveys should become relevant to both RIBA Plan of Work and the architects that often, after the finished handover to the client, the designer figure is rarely involved in evaluating and understanding the performance of the building user satisfaction.
0.WASTE.LAND wants to offer an online survey undertaken by the user/client of a building (within any of the RIBA Stage) is inspired by the light touch review, usually undertaken over phase 6. The short survey analyses only the clients’ point of view. For a physical visit of the place and a second-hand opinion and inspection of the resources is handed from a third party specialist, only after the client completed and the short online evaluation. In doing so, an in-depth POE evaluation could be book in the platform. By considering the collected data’s performance of a buildings and the Occupants’ perspectives on its performance, and accurate POE and information modelling system becomes integrative design process that enables subsequent retrieval of specific performance indicators, with minimal disruption to the daily function of occupants.
This service, arranged as a subscription or non-subscribed base would start by filling an online survey in the platform that could take place annually or biennially online, all the way up to three months before the refurbishment. In doing so, 0.WASTE.LAND Group advises RIBA to add a parallel Stage 8, which outlines a ‘non-essential building inspection’ that could inform a potential for non-demolition strategy or an additional need of design. However, despite acclaimed benefits of POE’s, and after more than a decade since its first introduction, it has neither become a mainstream industry practice nor a niche approach to evaluating buildings’ performance. The reason can retract to the limitations to making initiatives such as POE or Online Survey Evaluation, a routine. For instance, ‘not all projects are big enough to pay the extra cost of continuous engagement of the lead architect for 3 years after handover. Furthermore, there may simply not be cut space on site to accompany-site project team in house for the length of time required by the architect to reside in situ and observe the performance a building’s performance associated with Soft Landings was less than 0.25% of the construction cost on a full-scope appointment.’ (Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019)
Indeed, when new approaches to POE, Existing In-use property evaluation and reuse campaigns are explicitly converged, how does RIBA underline the importance of evaluating existing knowledge, existing surveys and adequate case studies?
Conclusion
Since constant remarks are in re-use campaigns and retrofit management, not many papers and models convey the importance of undertaking POE in the construction industry. This paper considers POE as an essential service, a non-mandatory part of 2020 RIBA’s Stages of Work. By clarifying its role and value in the existing structure, it becomes evident how, if well implemented, a Post Occupation Evaluation can make critical strategic decisions during, over, and end the building’s operating lifespan. Moreover, its former ‘end-vision’ should change. Creating a public available POE databases; designers’, builders’ and occupants’ experiences of a building’s performance are deposit in platform model available in Stage 8 over the new RIBA 2021 Plan of Work.
As more items are stored, facilities managers may use the information to make strategic decisions proactively as it grows over time. O.WASTE.LAND sets an online survey that facilitates and clarifies user satisfaction to the client’s and specialists’ minds. In doing so, by reviewing existing knowledge and stratagems, this paper proposes:
1-a shift within the RIBA Plan of Work by introducing a mandatory post-occupancy survey.
2- A POE depository (Stage 8 of 2021 RIBA Plan of Work) to proactively make strategic decisions.
If 0.WASTE.LAND uses and collects the information derived from a POE; existing knowledge could be compiled in a database, reusable for future projects and strategies.
Bibliography
Carbon Co-Op., 2020. People Powered Retrofit | Carbon Co-Op. [online] Available at: <https://carbon.coop/portfolio/people-powered-retrofit/> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Clements-Croome, D. (Ed.). (2014). Post-occupancy evaluation. In Intelligent buildings: An introduction.
UK: Routledge.
Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K. and Liyanage, C., 2019. A Critique Of Post‑Occupancy Evaluation In The UK. [online] Reseachgate. Available at: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330935788_A_critique_of_post-occupancy_evaluation_in_the_UK_iepl%5BgeneralViewId%5D=6CGPzxzNRq4XlnztNnGq1AOGxWzscjk5Jl8S&_iepl%5Bcontexts%5D%5B0%5D=searchReact&_iepl%5BviewId%5D=gv2fnUccjuDsiNzzoHxvYpSa05YGEQ2Jq2SL&_iepl%5BsearchType%5D=publication&_iepl%5Bdata%5D%5BcountLessEqual20%5D=1&_iepl%5Bdata%5D%5BinteractedWithPosition16%5D=1&_iepl%5Bdata%5D%5BwithoutEnrichment%5D=1&_iepl%5Bposition%5D=16&_iepl%5BrgKey%5D=PB%3A330935788&_iepl%5BtargetEntityId%5D=PB%3A330935788&_iepl%5BinteractionType%5D=publicationPreviewImage> [Accessed 5 January 2021].
Edwards, D., Garcia, M., Hosseini, R., Roberts, C., 2019. Post-Occupancy Evaluation: a review of literature. [online] Available at: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333795682_Post-occupancy_evaluation_a_review_of_literature> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Historic England., 2020. Buildings Must Be Recycled and Reused to Help Tackle Climate Change. [online] Available at: <https://historicengland.org.uk/whats-new/news/recycle-buildings-tackle-climate-change/> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Hurst, W., 2019. Introducing Retrofirst: A New AJ Campaign Championing Reuse In The Built Environment. [online] The Architects’ Journal. Available at: <https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/introducing-retrofirst-a-new-aj-campaign-championing-reuse-in-the-built-environment> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Lathum, M., 1994. Constructing The Team. 1st ed. London: HMSO.
Williams, F., 2020. Virtuous Circles: Can Reusing Building Materials In New Projects Go Mainstream?. [online] The Architects’ Journal. Available at: <https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/virtuous-circles-can-reusing-building-materials-in-new-projects-go-mainstream> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
RIBA,. 2020. RIBA Plan Of Work. [online] Available at: <https://www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-resources/resources-landing-page/riba-plan-of-work> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Ridgett, J., 2017. Why The RIBA Plan Of Work Could Undermine The Profession. [online] The Architects’ Journal. Available at: <https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/opinion/why-the-riba-plan-of-work-could-undermine-the-profession> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Vischer, J. (2002). Post-occupancy evaluation: A multifaceted tool for building improvement. In L. Stanley (Ed.), Learning from out buildings: a state-of-the-pracfice summary of post-occupancy evaluafion. US:National Academy Press.
Jain, N., 2019. Comparative Analysis Of Protocols Used In Measurement And Verification Of Energy. [online] Ibpsa.org. Available at: <http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BSO2018/5B-2.pdf> [Accessed 2 January 2021].
Way, M., & Bordass, B. (2005). Making feedback and post-occupancy evaluation routine 2: Soft landings involving design and building teams in improving performance. Building Research & Information, 33, pp. 353–360.
