Central Square

Hi Andrew

I'm not sure what to make of that. PM could be on a PR offensive or he may realise that buggering this up will blight rightacres showcase development, which if they get right might be a springboard to more non welsh projects of note given the exposure they have received as a result of this development overall.

PS welcome to the forum. Ignore Mr Blue Sky, he's a curmudgeonly old goat, harmless enough but always negative

Thanks, I guess. I've always wanted to be a celebrity. I've looked at my posts and I'm negative around 75% of the time.

But think about the news - that's negative about 95% of the time. Ignoring the news is a bad idea. My negativity is largely related to the LDP, and also about the growing Anglicisation if Cardiff, which are undoubtedly related in a myriad of ways. As a native of Cardiff I'm entitled to do that.

If Cardiff was getting a brilliant new transport exchange I'd be overjoyed as I've been using public transport, trains especially, to get around the area. Cardiff has decent public transport. But the extra homes need to be catered for and this new bus station isn't a good start.

I'm glad that you are happier Jantra.

I've been visiting this forum for a while and never had any urge to post anything, but thought you guys might be interested in this.

I sent quite a negative email to Rightacres about the design for the bus station – mostly about the look of the office and residential blocks, but also mentioning my concern about the number of bays for buses. I got the following response (edited for typos – he sent it from his phone):

Dear Mr ####

Thank you for your email.

I hear exactly what you say and indeed I personally share some of your concerns re the look of the building. Forgive me for not going into detail but some of your architectural concerns (and mine) are currently being addressed.

As far as the number of bays is concerned we had a footprint in which we could design the building. We have technical evidence that demonstrates the performance of the new station will be significantly better than the previous station.

Thank your for your kind remarks regarding our latest [projects] - I certainly hope that once the Interchange is complete you will feel the same about that.

I very much appreciate you making the effort to write to me - if as we move forward you'd like to come in and [have] a look at progress on site you are very welcome.

Regards

Paul McCarthy
Chief Executive
Rightacres Property Co.

Hi Andrew,

Thanks very much for your contribution.

If that rather frank response is indeed true, I'd really question:
a) What Employer's Requirements were written into the contract? Surely as the Developer/Client, they sign off on the design.
b) What is their Employer's Agent doing? It seems as if ISG and the Architect are running away from them.
c) What do they propose doing about it? It's gone in for planning permission and been approved subject to discharge of conditions. They have scope to vary the materials under non-material ammendments, but the general form they're pretty much stuck with.

It'll be interesting to see if they do anything at all. In my experience, money and contracts always dictate things.

Wait, so if the cheif executive of the company doesnt like the design, surely a word or two would be exchanged before the sign off of the building.. Im baffled.

Welcome to the forum, Andrew. I think you may have beaten everyone's first post by quite a distance!

That's really interesting. If it is indeed true, then clearly this project is running away from Rightacres. I would imagine PM is getting quite nervous about this. As others have said, Central Square is supposed to be Rightacres' breakout development. If something goes wrong then it severely hampers their credibility for developments in other regions and even in Cardiff itself.

From what he says in that mail, I can believe that Rightacres are not the problem here. They've made a fantastic start with One Central Square, and the BBC building is taking shape very nicely. If Two Central Square ends up like the renders then we'll have 3 very high quality builds. So why has the interchange gone so severely differently? We never saw any of this "value engineering" with these.

But then this does beg the question, who is responsible for this lacklustre development? I wonder what the conversations are like behind the scenes...

Most construction contracts for large projects are "Design & Build" form of contract. For those who don't know, it typically follows this sort of procurement:

*Developer/Client engages a design team of Consultants (Architect who are lead consultants, Structural Engineers, Mechanical & Electrical Engineers) who complete:
-> a preliminary design for planning and costing purposes
-> a tender package for prospective contractors to bid on.
*Bidding Process (where the Client and Consultant interview prospective Principal Contractors)
*Principal Contractor is appointed who is then responsible for delivering on the finished design that used for construction purposes.
->Principal Contractor starts to engage with his sub-contractors for different works packages.
->The Developer/Client’s Consultants usually end up working for the Contractor (it’s called “Novation”), who ends up treating them like his sub-contractors (basically like shit). It’s difficult because on one hand the Contractor is paying the Consultants but the Consultants still have some sort of obligation to the Client.
->Many of the items, particularly things like cladding, lift design and mechanical and electrical services, are often sub-contractor design led anyway, subject to performance specifications given by the Client and the Consultants.
->There’s an Employer’s Agent who is supposed to administer many aspects of the contract to ensure that the Client is getting what he is paying for.


So, if Rightacres are concerned about this, then either Foster + Partners have lost the plot or the contract between Rightacres and the Principal Contractor ISG allows them to vary the preliminary design (under a “Value Engineering” exercise) and get away with doing what they want. Typically, the cheapest, nastiest shite that even a donkey could build.

Quite often Architects are deliberately vague regarding materials during initial planning stages. It gives the people who are paying for the project wiggly room in case the cost of materials etc. changes dramatically from early planning stages to procurement (this happens quite often).

It’s interesting that Foster + Partners don’t seem to be involved with the other plots. It will be very telling if Rightacres appoint ISG to do those plots too or go within another contractor.

Most construction contracts for large projects are "Design & Build" form of contract. For those who don't know, it typically follows this sort of procurement:

*Developer/Client engages a design team of Consultants (Architect who are lead consultants, Structural Engineers, Mechanical & Electrical Engineers) who complete:
-> a preliminary design for planning and costing purposes
-> a tender package for prospective contractors to bid on.
*Bidding Process (where the Client and Consultant interview prospective Principal Contractors)
*Principal Contractor is appointed who is then responsible for delivering on the finished design that used for construction purposes.
->Principal Contractor starts to engage with his sub-contractors for different works packages.
->The Developer/Client’s Consultants usually end up working for the Contractor (it’s called “Novation”), who ends up treating them like his sub-contractors (basically like shit). It’s difficult because on one hand the Contractor is paying the Consultants but the Consultants still have some sort of obligation to the Client.
->Many of the items, particularly things like cladding, lift design and mechanical and electrical services, are often sub-contractor design led anyway, subject to performance specifications given by the Client and the Consultants.
->There’s an Employer’s Agent who is supposed to administer many aspects of the contract to ensure that the Client is getting what he is paying for.


So, if Rightacres are concerned about this, then either Foster + Partners have lost the plot or the contract between Rightacres and the Principal Contractor ISG allows them to vary the preliminary design (under a “Value Engineering” exercise) and get away with doing what they want. Typically, the cheapest, nastiest shite that even a donkey could build.

Quite often Architects are deliberately vague regarding materials during initial planning stages. It gives the people who are paying for the project wiggly room in case the cost of materials etc. changes dramatically from early planning stages to procurement (this happens quite often).

It’s interesting that Foster + Partners don’t seem to be involved with the other plots. It will be very telling if Rightacres appoint ISG to do those plots too or go within another contractor.

Sir Robert McAlpine (SRM) have the contract for demolition of Marland House / NCP and are negotiating the interchange construction contract - ISG are building Plots 2 and 3 (BBC). From my limited dealings with Rightacres, they will have been driving the value engineering and SRM will be going along with it to agree a price - which makes that e-mail from Paul McCarthy all the more strange.

The whole interchange saga is a shambles from the minute the agreement was made for the BBC to use the existing bus station site - the council had been complicit in this for buying into those flashy artists inpressions when they hadn't agreed with Rightacres whether the design could actually be delivered (both to the budget at the time and by the end of 2017 which was the original stated completion date). Various rounds of value engineering followed behind the scenes - the basement was removed to save time and cost along with all the other changes discussed on here. In the background the demolition of the car park has been delayed while agreement was reached with NCP (finally agreed) with a date towards the end of the year currently being discussed for piling to start.

So what happens next will be interesting to see - I did give someone a call from SRM last week and he said that they were pricing drawings that were not yet in the public domain - maybe this means there are further changes to come as hinted in that e-mail? Whatever happens I don't think Rightacres or CCC have enhanced their reputation during this process.

Ahhh, that is interesting. I thought ISG were the Principal Contractors, but then I have no involvement with this scheme.

People have been commenting on the two tower projects I have been working on with reference to drawings that are in the public domain, thinking that they are the actually drawings. In reality, they're often months out of date and what the Planners have before them isn't always what the design team are working to.

As I said, I find that email response really bizarre, as I can't imagine that Rightacres have had no say in any of these value engineering exercises.

I think we'll all have to wait until we see the non-material ammendment planning drawings released.

Whilst like most people I loved the original concept and renders, I'm not fussed on the design change to a boxy structure however the choice of materials etc have really disappointed me. The other developments on the square are of high quality and I think if they continue with the changes the new interchange will be a huge let down.

I also agree with others regarding the number of bus stops etc, I think they are being short sighted here and not planning for the long term future. You would think this would all tie in with redevelopment of the Central Station but I don't get this impression at all.

Whilst like most people I loved the original concept and renders, I'm not fussed on the design change to a boxy structure however the choice of materials etc have really disappointed me. The other developments on the square are of high quality and I think if they continue with the changes the new interchange will be a huge let down.

I also agree with others regarding the number of bus stops etc, I think they are being short sighted here and not planning for the long term future. You would think this would all tie in with redevelopment of the Central Station but I don't get this impression at all.

Yup. Hardly any bus stops for what is going to be the "heart of a metro for 1.5 million people"

No longevity

No futureproofing

Boots, The pharmacy on Wood Street will relocate to its new home at the under-construction BBC Wales headquarters next spring, it was announced today.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... r-12741060