Value engineering sometimes translates into a compromised design. But Rother District Council used partnering to fix costs for its new swimming pool – and still get the design it wants.
Government is one of the construction industry's biggest clients, but even they don't always get partnering right. More often than not local councils are obliged to invite tenders for projects, which are then selected largely on a cost basis. Spending public money is always a highly sensitive issue.

But Rother District Council, on the south coast of England, has taken a different approach to the design and construction of a new swimming pool in the town of Rye in East Sussex. Partnering has been at the heart of this process, and as client Rother District Council has led the way. The fact that Rother has proved so successful at demonstrating commitment to partnering played a part in its successful bid for lottery funding for the pool. Sport England has approved almost £2 million as part funding for the project.

Plans for a swimming pool for the Sussex town of Rye extend back to the mid-1980s but money was prioritised for expenditure elsewhere, and Rother District Council rejected a proposal by the Rye & District Swimming Association on the grounds that the running costs of the proposed pool would be too high.

However, local research had highlighted the need for a swimming pool, and an improved sports complex in Rye. Rother decided to take over the proposals for a new swimming pool in 1997. It formed a steering committee which included Rother District Council, Sport England and the operators of the existing Rye sports centre among others.

Rother District Council set a design brief and appointed a design team comprising the steering committee and architects J D Clarke & Partners of Eastbourne. An initial (stage one) lottery bid was submitted to the Sport England Lottery fund. Stage one support was given, subject to some design amendments.

Tony Leonard, director of community services at Rother District Council says the choice of architects is vital: "JDC has worked with us on a previous project. This is probably one of the crucial elements of partnering: the client needs to have an excellent relationship with the architect. If the approach isn't right then in my view the project won't work as well."

As a client, the council needed the architect to go the extra mile: "JDC worked closely with our project manager, and they have been very flexible about our needs as a district council in terms of budgets, and our human resources provision."

The council had already won stage one Lottery approval and planning permission for the scheme before it had appointed the contractor. At the initial tendering stage, tender invitations were for fixed costs (ie preliminaries), percentage margin for overheads and profits on trade packages. However, the council wanted to do more than simply accept tenders in the usual way. Interviews were conducted with potential contractors which covered areas such as previous experience on similar projects, and health and safety record. Mowlem South East was selected and a partnership with Rother Council established to enable the constructor to build the pool for the submitted project cost.

Once the contractor was on board, the council invested £240 000 on stage two – getting an agreed detailed design at fixed cost. At this stage the team included: quantity surveyor Citex, m&e consultant Ian White Associates, structural engineer Stephen Wilson Partnership, health and safety consultant Dearle & Henderson, as well as the architect.

Mark Anderson, associate at John D Clarke & Associates, says: "We wanted to get more cost certainty into the project, which is where partnering helped. The costs we got back from the qs were much greater than anticipated, so we all worked to re-engineer the project."

David Hodge, senior surveyor with quantity surveyor Citex says: "Partnering as a concept for procuring is becoming more popular. In the concept adopted by Rother, the contractor becomes involved in the project much earlier in the process than would normally happen under traditional procurement methods."

He explains: "Essentially it's a two-stage process in which the contractor is selected at stage one and can then contribute to the design development of the scheme, often bringing about cost savings."

One of the important aspects of the second stage was that the basic design of the scheme had already been approved and therefore was largely fixed.

Anderson comments: "We started with Mowlem from the point of view that we had our basic scheme but hadn't gone into the detailed design stage. We had the aesthetic that we wanted to achieve and the conceptual side had been approved as our base. Mowlem came on board and quickly got to grips with where we were coming from. When we got down to the detail working closely with Mowlem, it was a case of tweaking details and looking at construction methods to get to budget as opposed to physically changing the scheme."

Ian White, of m&e consultant Ian White Associates says: "We had very intense meetings to find out what we could do to bring costs down without affecting the scheme. Some of the areas we thought we could make best cost on didn't happen, but in other areas we found we could make savings from both the architectural and engineering points of view."

White points out that as potential cost savings were identified, they were prioritised: "Some savings were potentially huge, but not acceptable to the design. " This included retaining in-pool lights because they are an important element of pool safety not simply decoration. However, some architectural features were altered such as wall niches which were not required.

"From an architectural point of view, a few of the niceties disappeared, but the overall concept has been maintained. I don't think the design has been compromised at all," says Anderson.

This element of value engineering worked all the way along the construction chain, involving sub-contractors. "We asked what they could offer for less cost without reducing the value or quality of the building. There were a lot of little items which soon added up," says White.

The process sounds simple on paper, but has involved a great deal of work from the key members of the construction team. Leonard also emphasises the need for an experienced project manager to ensure the process runs smoothly (in this case Iain McFarlan). Working this way also required the client to be persuasive – to ensure that the district council committee was happy for a new type of tendering process to be used.

It is also significant that this is a new approach for Sport England: "As a result of our good working relationship with Sport England, they were keen to develop the partnership approach as a pilot scheme and this has proved highly successful," says Tony Leonard.

However, even though the project is not due for completion until next year, the team has already seen the benefits.

Ian White says: "At the end of the day, Sport England could see that the project had been thoroughly value engineered, and was prepared to dig a little deeper for its contribution. The project is good value for money."

Alwyn Roebuck, Rother's contracts and amenity services manager, makes one of the most important points: "I found this a more satisfactory way to work than design and build. We have used that before and didn't really get the design we anticipated.

"By commissioning and working with the architect on our design brief, and then looking at costs, you tend to keep the design principle rather than having too much value engineering at the start."