National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 1989. Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9805.
×
Page R12

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

IMPROVING THE DESIGN QUALITY OF FEDERAL BUILDINGS Committee on Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings Building Research Board Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council National Academy Press Washington, DC 1989

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government~on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Samuel O. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. This report was prepared as part of the technical program of the Federal Construction Council (FCC). The FCC is a continuing activity of the Building Research Board, which is a unit of the Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems of the National Research Council. The purpose of the FCC is to promote cooperation among federal construction agencies and between such agencies and other elements of the building community in addressing technical issues of mutual concern. The FCC program is supported by 14 federal agencies: the Department of the Air Force, the Department of the Army, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Department of the Navy, the Department of State, the General Services Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Postal Service, the U.S. Public Health Service, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Veterans Administration. Funding for the FCC program was provided through the following agreements between the indicated federal agency and the National Academy of Sciences: Department of State Contract No. 1030-621218; National Endowment for the Arts Grant No. 42-4253-0091; National Science Foundation Grant No. MSM-8600676, under master agreement 82-05615; and U.S. Postal Service grant, unnumbered. Limited supplies of this document are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20418. A charge of $3.00 for postage and handling must be prepaid. Printed in the United States of America

Building Research Board 1988-89 CHAIRMAN RICHARD T. BAUM, Consultant, Jaros, Baum and Bolles, New York, New York MEMBERS LYNN S. BEEDLE, University Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering and Director, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania GERALD L. CARLISLE, International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen, Washington, D.C. RAY F. DeBRUHL, Executive Vice President, Davidson and Jones Corporation, Raleigh, North Carolina C. CHRISTOPHER DEGENHARDT, President, EDAW, Inc., San Francisco, California DAVID R. DIBNER, Senior Vice President, Bernard Johnson, Inc., Bethesda, Maryland EZRA D. EHRENKRANTZ, President, Ehrenkrantz, Eckstut and Whitelaw, New York, New York ELISHA C. FREEDMAN, Consultant, Associated Public Sector Consultants & University of Connecticut, West Hartford, Connecticut DENOS C. GAZIS, Assistant Director, Semiconductor Science and Technology, IBM Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York GEORGE S. JENKINS, Consultation Networks Inc., Washington, D.C. RICHARD H. JUDY, Director, Dade County Aviation Department, Miami, Florida FREDERICK KRIMGOLD, Associate Dean for Research and Extension, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Alexandria MILTON PIKARSKY, Distinguished Professor and Director, Institute of Transportation Systems, The City College, New York, New York KENNETH F. REINSCHMIDT, Vice President, Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts LESLIE E. ROBERTSON, Director, Design and Construction, Leslie E. Robertson Associates, New York, New York NANCY S. RUTLEDGE, Consultant, Woolwich, Maine RICHARD L. TUCKER, Director, Construction Industry Institute, The University of Texas, Austin JAMES E. WOODS, Senior Engineering Manager, Honeywell, Inc., Golden Valley, Minnesota APRIL L. YOUNG, Vice President, N.V.R. Development, McLean, Virginia iii

STAFF ANDREW C. LEMER, Director HENRY A. BORGER, Executive Secretary, Federal Construction Council PETER H. SMEALLIE, Executive Secretary, Public Facilities Council PATRICIA M. WHOLEY, Administrative Coordinator JOANN V. CURRY, Senior Secretary LENA B. GRAYSON, Senior Secretary iv

COMMITTEE ON IMPROVING THE DESIGN QUALITY OF FEDERAL BUILDINGS Chairman CLIFTON D. WRIGHT, Hon. AIA, Chairman and CEO, 3DI, Alexandria, VA Members DAVID P. BILLINGTON, Professor of Civil Engineering, School of Engineering and Applied Science, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ GEORGE M. NOTTER, JR., President, Notter, Finegold & Alexander, Washington, DC TOM LEWIS PEYTON, JR., PE, Leo A. Daly, Washington, DC WOLFGANG F.E. PREISER, Ph.D., Professor and Director, Center for Research and Development, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque BELINDA REEDER, ARCHETYPE, Washington, DC JAMES RICH, Assistant Vice President, Sigal/Zuckerman Co., Washington, DC JAMES A. SCHEMMER, The Schemmer Associates, Bellevue, WA PETER N. STEIGERWALD, Director, Facilities and Administrative Services, TRW, Inc., Cleveland, OH FCC Liaison Representatives DONALD D. BOYLE, PE, AIA, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Management Services, U.S. Public Health Service, Rockville, MD WILLIAM A. BROWN, SR., PE, HAIA, Chief, Architecture and Engineering, Air Force Directorate of Engineering and Services, HQ USAF/LEE, Building 516 Bolling AFB, DC DOYLE D. CARRINGTON, Office of Facilities, Veterans Administration, Washington, DC LOUIS E. CHILDERS, General Manager, Design Division, U.S. Postal Service, Washington, DC EDWARD J. EAST, Civil Engineer, Engineering Division, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Department of the Army, Washington, DC EVERETT B. FRANKS, AIA, Deputy Director, Office of Engineering Services, DHHS Public Health Service, Seattle, WA THOMAS GALLEGOS, PE, Director, IHS-Office of Engineering, Health, and Environment, U.S. Public Health Service, Rockville, MD v

THOMAS D. HURLEY, Director, Design Policy Management Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, VA DALE JACKSON, Directorate of Engineering and Services, Balling AFB, DC RACHEL JAMES, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC JACK METZLER, General Engineer, Office of Projects and Facilities Management, Department of Energy, Washington, DC ED PAGE, Project Officer, Tyndall AFB, FL WILLIAM QUADE, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, VA VINCE SPAULDING, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, VA DWAIN WARNE, Chief, Engineering Branch, Public Buildings Sevice, General Services Administration, Washington, DC EDWARD WILSON, Project Officer, Tyndall AFB, FL Project Staff ANDREW C. LEMER, Director HENRY BORGER, Executive Secretary, FCC JOANN CURRY, Senior Secretary LENA GRAYSON, Senior Secretary ROGER L. SCHLUNTZ, Consultant Hi

PREFACE But though genius cannot be [earn' d, it may be improv'd: And though the Gift of Designing is born with a Man, it may be methodized by Study and Observation. The principal Points, therefore, that the Designer should have in view, are first Convenience...., and then Beauty and Magnificence. With regard to Convenience, few Directions can be given, since it means no more than con- triving all the requisites belonging to your Plan, in the most clear and elegant Manner, and then laying out the Space they are to be ranged in with the most perfect Order and Economy. As to Beauty and Magnificence, they are Themes never to be exhausted; and though many Volumes have been written on them already, as many more might still be added. ---from the Builder's Dictionary or, Gentleman and Architect's Companion, January 1734 More than two and one half centuries later, we are still learning how to ''methodizer' design, and still actively debating how to balance the demands of Convenience, Beauty, and Magnificence in building design. This document reports on the work of a committee of professionals who found themselves embroiled in that debate. We were asked by the Federal Construction Council (FCC)1 to review how government design policies and practices influence the quality of design of federal construction projects, and to make recommendations for how federal agencies might better ensure receipt of high quality design in the future. Our discussions--to define the meaning of quality in design, the sources of impediments to obtaining quality, and how to ensure quality--were often lively. iFourteen federal government agencies with major interests in building and facilities research, construction, operation, and maintenance comprise the Federal Construction Council. These agencies had a combined construc- tion budget in FY 1988 exceeding $12 billion. · ~ V11

Some of our members, sharing the view expressed some years ago, by Senator Moynihan, that "...twentieth-century America has seen a steady, persistent decline in the visual and emotional power of its public build- ings,''2 argued that getting higher quality meant reversing this decline. Others, reflecting on the constraints of government budgets and unavoidably bureaucratic procedures, suggested that our discussions would be more fruitful if focused on producing appropriate and error-free building pro- grams, plans, drawings and specifications. Our effort to achieve a balanced consensus was constrained by our own budgets of time and resources. We have, in the end, been both less forceful with regard to the need for strong federal support of the best that our nation's designers have to offer, and less detailed and specific with regard to the policies and procedures that the government can use to ac- complish this end, be done. than any of us might have wished. There is more to We nevertheless believe that identifying these issues in our committee's meetings and the spirited discussion of our Woods Hole workshop, and our resulting recommendations, are useful steps toward a worthy goal. hope this report will not be an ending, but rather a marker in a continuing effort by the Building Research Board and others to enhance the quality of our nation's built environment. Clifton D. Wright, Jr., Chairman, Committee on Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings Andrew C. Lemer, Director, Building Research Board goal. We 2Daniel P. Moynihan, introduction, Ada Louise Huxtable, Will They Ever Finish Bruckner Boulevard?, Macmillan Publishing Co., New York, N.Y. 1971. · . . v' ~ ~ .

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Each year the U.S. government builds or renovates hundreds of thousands of square feet of building space to accommodate a diverse array of civilian and military activities.3 These buildings are part of the essential infra- structure of government and the public good that our government seeks to serve. Even more, because they house our government, these buildings are symbols of the strength and purpose of the nation. The public agencies responsible for constructing and managing federal buildings seek to improve the quality of building design they receive from the private architecture and engineering firms they employ. Agencies of the Federal Construction Council (FCC) are concerned about recurring problems of errors in drawings and specifications, poorly formulated de- signs, and mediocre appearance of their new and renovated buildings. While recognizing that the process of building design is very complex and depends on the ability of design professionals to make judgments balancing disparate and often conflicting factors, these agencies are concerned that federal policies and agency management practices are failing to deliver the quality of design that the government and the nation need and deserve. While the Committee on Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings unclear whether design quality on the whole is significantly to and found it lower on design projects tor reuera' government agencies, as compared projects for private clients, there is no question that quality can should be improved. The committee recommends that there are five Genera' areas in which changes in federal agencies' practices could bring about improvement in the quality of design delivered to these agencies: _ ~_ _ . ~_ ~ - to . The pre-design planning and programming stages of building procure- ment can have important consequences for quality. Budgets set at these early stages may constrain the designer's options in the building's design and influence his decision-making during design development. Congressional involvement at these early stages tends to fix budgets more firmly than is appropriate for the high uncertainty in forecasts of costs. Agencies 3The committee did not attempt to document the government's total annual building program. However, total federal government construction spending for buildings and other facilities in 1986 was approximately $48 billion. 1X

should be allowed greater internal budget management flexibility to accommo- date variations in single projects, subject to maintaining budget stability in their overall building program, and spending authorization should be given longer periods of time. 0 Agencies have adopted A/E selection procedures, contracting arrange- ments, and design management mechanisms that can make it difficult for the agency to select best qualified design firms and to communicate the agency's needs most effectively to the designer. Agencies should rely less on standardized rating procedures for judging design firms' qualifi- cations, and should consider increased use of outside reviewers working with agency personnel in the contract selection process. · Improved participation is needed during design and construction by knowledgeable personnel of both agencies and A/E firms providing design services to these agencies. Increased peer review throughout the duration of the ~ the client agencies, and with reference to clearly and explicitly stated design objectives--would not only improve quality control but would also enhance the profession's ability to learn by experience and thereby achieve longer term improvements in quality of design. · Agencies and the private A/E firms are missing opportunities to learn by experience through post-design evaluation, both pre-construction and post-occupancy. Design awards programs and reporting on users' experi- ence with buildings in operation could be effectively used to foster im- proved understanding of what characteristics define good quality of design. · Overall building program management practices of agencies sometimes run counter to the interests of achieving quality, particularly when pro- curement is based too heavily on a desire to minimize costs. Agencies should insure that their design criteria and guidelines are not restricting opportunities for designers to achieve quality design. design process--conouctec by personnel wltnln the resign rlrm ano The committee considered the federal advocacy for quality in creation of an executive council on design quality in federal buildings, and designation of a senior professional within each agency responsible for representing the agency on the council and for serving as the focus and advocate for design quality within that agency. The committee noted that centralization of design and design advocacy has precedents in the government's building programs or models in such activities as President Kennedy's Ad Hoc Committee on Federal Office Space (convened in 1961), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Office of the Surgeon General. The committee found that the workshop's suggestion warrants further investi- gation, and commends the idea to the Congress and its committees that oversee federal design and construction. merits of establishing more centralized design. Workshop participants proposed . x

CONTENTS 1. 2. 3. APPENDICES: INTRODUCTION ISSUES OF QUALITY OF DESIGN IN FEDERAL BUILDINGS The Scale and Consequence of Design Activity in Federal Buildings Design Quality and the Design Development Process Challenges in Achieving Quality of Design in Federal Buildings A Workshop on Quality of Design A WORKSHOP ON OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVING QUALITY OF DESIGN Pre-Design Planning and Programming Architect/Engineer Selection Participation in Design and Construction Design Evaluation Building Approval and General Management ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF FEDERAL BUILDING DESIGN Recommendations for Agency Action Pre-design Planning and Programming Architect/Engineer Selection Participation in Design and Construction Design Evaluation Building Approval and General Management Congressional Action and Centralized Advocacy for Design Historic Perspective Current Alternative Models Participation in Design Post-Design Evaluation General Management of Design Improving the Quality of Design A. Federal Agencies B. Workshop Participants C. Workshop Agenda and Subcommittee Assignments D. Committee Biographical Sketches X1 3 3 5 8 9 10 13 16 19 21 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 25 25 27 29 29 29 30 33 37 41 45

Next: 1 Introduction »
Improving the Design Quality of Federal Buildings Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $40.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF
  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!