I was honoured to serve as a juror in this year’s Justice Facilities Review; under the capable leadership of Frank Greene, FAIA.; and supported by the strong staff of the AIA.
Here are five observations:
- As a Canadian, I always look forward to stimulating conversations with my American counterparts. Once again, despite all the messages that say otherwise, we all have more in common than we might think.
This year’s jury was comprised of folks from diverse geographic and professional backgrounds. Apart from the observation that some of us ‘talk funny’; it is readily apparent that across our two countries, the people and issues and trends are the same. So are the solutions; people of good will taking time to conduct respectful conversations about the thorny issues of the day, and advocating bold solutions
I’m particularly pleased to be involved given the theme for this Conference; Crossing Borders.
- This year’s submitted projects demonstrate that Academy members are successfully engaging with Owners to drive program and societal change. I believe we are all are becoming increasingly more sophisticated in both articulating desired performance outcomes, and crafting procurement and construction documents that will measure the results.
The Projects we reviewed demonstrate thoughtful and creative efforts to use good building design to address behavioural change. Whether it’s a Corrections facility aiming to rehabilitate offenders, a Courts project seeking to identify with indigenous traditions; or to improve workflows within a traditional design, a police facility determined to brand itself as a Public Service Agency; or a border crossing facility required to satisfy an incredibly complex mandate; the submitted projects illustrate the struggle for excellence continues. Juror comments illustrate thoughtful linkage of design approaches with stated outcomes, driven by a well documented planning process.
- The conversation about sustainability is slowly shifting. Owners are beginning to realize that sustainability is not merely a philosophical issue, but forms part of a rigorous business case review prior to project approval. In our sector, all projects are publicly funded; so perceived economic impacts will properly be subject to public scrutiny; and must be supported by data.
Jury comments reflect we’re not there yet, when it comes to creating a common language and metrics by which to measure perceived sustainability economic value. I believe we all instinctively know when a project is tracking on sustainability goals, however we can do better demonstrating and documenting those benefits. Whether by using energy models, or hard total energy reduction targets, we must firm up both our requirements and the way we report.
I hear some grumbling from Owners about the documentation requirements for LEED and WELL, so we must be diligent to have processes that support our goals without becoming overly bureaucratic. The difficult challenge of quantifying business case benefits of sustainability is one we can all embrace and learn to do better. I look forward to hearing of the Jury reviewing the first net zero AAJ project.
- Consideration of occupant health and well being continues to grow in importance. I’m observing a trend towards more up-front consideration of this, and believe we need to become more sophisticated about quantifying impacts earlier in the planning process. As I warden, I would frequently remind facilities folks that the building is the number two most expensive line item in my budget. Staffing is number one. There is a strong business case argument that thoughtful incorporation of these principles early in the design can positively impact staff engagement. Again, our challenge is to develop both language and metrics to demonstrate this.
Many projects in our sector include detention areas for involuntary occupants. These facilities deserve a separate discussion on this topic. There is increasing awareness that our historical detention practices are simply not acceptable today. Last fall’s conference on Mental Health and Justice underscored one area of the work ahead of us. Juror’s comments this year included statements acknowledging project teams’ considerations of the humanity of both occupants and staff.
- Alternate Financing and Procurement methods aren’t going away. This year’s projects demonstrated a wide range of approaches. Given much of my recent experience is with Private Public Partnerships, I’d observe that the procurement method can’t be allowed to get in the way of a well-designed project. It takes more work up front, but that work pays off.
Jurors noted thoughtful and clever use of architectural elements to achieve desired results without any reference to the procurement model used. There are many reasons jurisdictions choose one procurement model or another. Our primary goal must still be to deliver a project that firstly meets the Program’s needs; and then consider how best to control for the other variables such as financing, risk and life cycle impact on upfront capital cost. This whole field is evolving, and it can be hard work to keep on top of all the emerging issues.
I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to meet a whole new group of smart people, and to engage in rigorous conversation about these important issues. The experience and the new friendships are treasured memories. I thank you for the opportunity to serve.
Tedd Howard is a retired British Columbia Corrections Warden. He was in charge of the Province’s Corrections Capital Projects program and was Chief Project Officer for two major Correctional Centre Projects. Currently, Tedd advises Owners during the planning, procurement and implementation of major capital projects, specializing in Alternative Procurement and Public Private Partnerships. He is also the Chief Project Officer for the Abbotsford Law Courts Project.