Cladding & Curtain Walling
21 April 1989

PASSING THE BUCK
James Landels, partner of architects Kneale and Russell, has found that product selection and contractual procedures are two recurring problems on many of their cladding projects. He describes two cases.

IS the choice of cladding material unlimited or not for an architect should he wish to specify it?

We have found that there are two fundamental problems which constantly arise on certain types of projects - product selection and the ensuing contractual procedures.

The product selection problem arises on projects where the need for good appearance and quality is married to a limited budget. A statement often made by clients in this situation is: "we don't want it to look like an advanced industrial unit in its most basic form but we don't suppose we can afford a highly sophisticated system like system X?" A less well developed system has therefore to be adopted and developed.

Contractual problems arise later. This is because of a client's understandable refusal to accept the nomination of a system, whose potential failure coupled with the possibility of the system supplier ceasing to trade would result in the client being responsible for the system.

The preference is for the main contractor to accept responsibility for the design team's choice of system by naming the system in the tender documents, and for the main contractor to appoint his own subcontractor to erect the system. This situation protects the client by relying on the fact that the main contractor would have a longer trading life than the system supplier.

We first met these problems five years ago when we were selecting a suitable cladding material for a small laboratory building. At that time in central Scotland there were a great many' 'metal'-clad sheds" but few examples of the quality of cladding and detailing which we were seeking.

We looked at architecture magazines and product literature for ideas, sought prices and then had to explain to our client why our cladding proposals were 50% higher than using the traditional construction of bricks and mortar. Location, size of project (500 m2), foreign systems and quality were all part of the explanation which the client understood but rejected on cost grounds.

A last ditch tour of central Scotland was undertaken to find a tried and tested system of a comparative price to brickwork but which also had the aesthetic appeal we were seeking. The tour was a success and a system was located which had been used by a new town Development.

next page >>