Like the familiar adage, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?,” every building project starts with the same conundrum: Should the client and its design team establish a budget and design a building which meets that budget, or should the team design a project and hope that it fits the budget which the client has set aside for the project
The simple truth is that the concept for every building, and its corresponding program, predates the expense for that building. And if an owner didn’t need the building, there would be no design and there would be no cost. But it’s also true that, as soon as an owner decides to embark on a project, it’s critical to establish the financial benchmarks to verify the viability of the endeavor.
But, for a number of reasons, things don’t always go as planned. One reason is that owners don’t always communicate clearly with their design teams at the outset of projects. For example, several years ago, we were on a design team that presented a concept design to a nonprofit institution for its new building. After weeks of design work, including a pricing exercise, the administrators told us that the project cost was significantly higher than they could afford. They probably had a number in their heads all along, but they had not shared it with the design team in advance. To reduce the cost, the staff had to reprogram the building and the architects had to redesign it.
Obviously, it’s much better if all stakeholders agree to certain parameters before starting any work, especially when a budget is firm. So even if your client does not share its budget with the design team early in the process, don’t assume there is no cap on the cost.
Cost estimates from a napkin sketch?
Even though it’s necessary to produce estimates during the early planning and master planning phases of projects, that process can be tricky, especially if the design team has little information to go on. In extreme cases, clients have asked us to provide estimates based on no more than just napkin sketches. In those cases, all the design team and owner can do is discuss the high-level cost drivers because you can’t do quantity take-off of materials at that point in the project. Such exercises are not always clear or beneficial for the client or the team.
Still, even preliminary estimates based on known parameters can still be useful to demonstrate the implications and challenges of implementing broad conceptual ideas. On one occasion, while we were working on a master planning exercise, the designers produced several schemes in order to pinpoint a potential range of costs. It became apparent that the owner was looking to bracket the highest and lowest costs related to different scopes of work. We quickly provided a throughline of financial understanding for these scopes and costs. It didn’t even require an extensive process.
As this last example illustrates, there’s usually a bit of give and take on cost, even though the client and design team might have to make some compromises. Currently, we’re assisting on a master plan for a county agency. In order to build consensus for a plan that meets the county’s budget, the design team is spending a lot of time determining what the stakeholders want.
For the purposes of identifying the cost, and because there are limitations on the budget, we’re honing into what they need as opposed to what they want to have. It’s good to know the cost implications of these two choices because they’re probably not the same.
We find that it’s even more critical to engage in a meaningful dialogue with the owner and consultant team in cases like this when the outlines of a project are still a little blurry around the edges. In fact, the less established criteria that’s available, the more important it is for the design team to ask the right questions of the owner and listen closely. As we gain a better understanding of the essential program needs, we can benchmark the budget earlier and more accurately.
Providing a high-level understanding of the costs required to meet basic programmatic needs does not need to be an exhaustive exercise. It’s critical to any project, with the exception of those rare owners who can afford not to know–if there really is such a thing. Rather, as a DLR Group colleague once expressed to me, the “form follows funding” approach is the reality for most, particularly institutional and public-sector clients. For our part, we enlist many strategies: published resources; our own 20-year historic database; and our teams’ insight and experience that allows our group to accurately predict costs.
That being said, it’s a bit of a misnomer to answer our original question about which comes first. Designing and budgeting are iterative, interconnected processes that should unfold in tandem as early as possible. As our clients will attest, we believe and enjoy establishing a system of frequent and effective communications throughout the project so that the design team and the owner will be aligned all the way through for success.
About the Author
Victoria Cabanos, Founding and Managing Principal of the Stuart-Lynn Company, is a trained architect and construction professional with over twenty five years of experience in the construction industry. She has worked on a variety of project types in a diversity of roles, including project architect, production engineer, construction supervisor and project manager. With an extensive knowledge of materials and methods and an integrated understanding of the entire construction process she has successfully demonstrated a skill set which includes designing, directing, budgeting, scheduling, resource management and vendor contract negotiations within aspects of the construction industry. She has managed numerous complex project teams, and has brought essential quality management services to the work, while keeping it firmly on budget and schedule. Her in-depth understanding of and familiarity with all aspects of construction afford her an overview of the work that allows for the best determination of priorities. She has also provided valuable insight for lease negotiation and contract development early on in the design process, and has ensured that the most qualified selection of contractors has been reviewed and evaluated for competency and compatibility. Victoria is also an accomplished professional woodworker and the managing partner in her own woodworking firm.
Related Stories
Urban Planning | Jan 25, 2022
Retooling innovation districts for medium-sized cities
This type of development isn’t just about innovation or lab space; and it’s not just universities or research institutions that are driving this change.
Sponsored | Resiliency | Jan 24, 2022
Norshield Products Fortify Critical NYC Infrastructure
New York City has two very large buildings dedicated to answering the 911 calls of its five boroughs. With more than 11 million emergency calls annually, it makes perfect sense. The second of these buildings, the Public Safety Answering Center II (PSAC II) is located on a nine-acre parcel of land in the Bronx. It’s an imposing 450,000 square-foot structure—a 240-foot-wide by 240-foot-tall cube. The gleaming aluminum cube risesthe equivalent of 24 stories from behind a grassy berm, projecting the unlikely impression that it might actually be floating. Like most visually striking structures, the building has drawn as much scorn as it has admiration.
Sponsored | Resiliency | Jan 24, 2022
Blast Hazard Mitigation: Building Openings for Greater Safety and Security
Coronavirus | Jan 20, 2022
Advances and challenges in improving indoor air quality in commercial buildings
Michael Dreidger, CEO of IAQ tech startup Airsset speaks with BD+C's John Caulfield about how building owners and property managers can improve their buildings' air quality.
3D Printing | Jan 12, 2022
Using 3D-printed molds to create unitized window forms
COOKFOX designer Pam Campbell and Gate Precast's Mo Wright discuss the use of 3D-printed molds from Oak Ridge National Lab to create unitized window panels for One South First, a residential-commercial high-rise in Brooklyn, N.Y.
Engineers | Jan 12, 2022
Private equity: An increasingly attractive alternative for AEC firm sellers
Private equity firms active in the AEC sector work quietly in the background to partner with management, hold for longer periods, and build a win-win for investors and the firm. At a minimum, AEC firms contemplating ownership transition should consider private equity as a viable option. Here is why.
Sponsored | BD+C University Course | Jan 12, 2022
Total steel project performance
This instructor-led video course discusses actual project scenarios where collaborative steel joist and deck design have reduced total-project costs. In an era when incomplete structural drawings are a growing concern for our industry, the course reveals hidden costs and risks that can be avoided.
University Buildings | Jan 11, 2022
Designing for health sciences education: supporting student well-being
While student and faculty health and well-being should be a top priority in all spaces within educational facilities, this article will highlight some key considerations.
Green | Jan 10, 2022
The future of regenerative building is performance-based
Why measuring performance results is so critical, but also easier said than done.
Contractors | Jan 5, 2022
Adding construction workers safely during a chronic worker shortage
ISN's Joe Schloesser discusses how contractors desperate for workers need to continue to make safety a priority. Schloesser is a Senior Director with ISN, a global construction management firm.