Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Big Fish - 31 January 2008

  • Comment
Make’s John Prevc wonders if some of the stress could be taken out of the government’s Building Schools for the Future programme
What process consumes the efforts of six teams comprising financiers, contractors, architects, and a huge number of consultants and specialists designing 30 buildings for 18 months, then throws 25 of the 30 designs into the bin? It’s Building Schools for the Future (BSF) of course.
Make was recently part of the unsuccessful Skanska-led team bidding for the Kent County Council BSF programme. The team included Atkins, dRMM, DSDHA and FLACQ.
We invested between two and eight architects at different stages of the process, all of whom were
100 per cent committed to the project. The bid effectively consumed 25 architects for a period of 12 months.
The capital investment involved in delivering such a bid runs into the millions of pounds. But the question of whether it will result in more considered, qualitydriven contractors is unclear.
I certainly believe that our bid produced exceptional designs which would have delivered the education needed for each of the individual schools we considered.
But is it worth going through the stress of this process? Personally, the answer has to be yes! To give up what is one of the most rewarding building types would be a travesty. But how we get there must change.
  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.