An essential instrument for assessing and verifying the sustainability efficiency of buildings is the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM). Even while BREEAM assessments are very helpful in encouraging ethical behaviour and producing ecological designs, there are a few typical issues that might prevent a project from being completed and earning the appropriate certification. It is essential to comprehend these traps to complete the assessment procedure. To get a good rating in terms of security needs assessment you should probably look up security needs assessment near me.
These are only some of the remarks that developers, project teams and contractors have made after going through a gruesome BREEAM process and finding themselves scratching their heads over the last bits of data needed to ‘get it over the line’. This belief is mostly justified by the fact that design teams did not incorporate BREEAM into their work from the beginning. Furthermore, we are not discussing post-planning; rather, we are discussing Project Feasibility (RIBA Stage 1) from the very beginning.
However, we also discover that early aspirations to excel in BREEAM frequently stall out as larger project milestones and objectives take precedence throughout crucial phases of the process, such as contract signing, planning submission, and tender (pre-qualification, invitation to tender, tender review period, etc.). Keeping these things in mind, you can be setting yourself up for some traps if you don’t have the necessary tools:
- Less than anticipated BREEAM rating
- Breaking the terms of the contract or the planning requirements
- Higher initial investment costs
- Poorly operating building
- Inadequate user experience
- After the project is finished, a “thorn in your side” BREEAM Assessor will ask for details.
1. Insufficient Forethought And Early Involvement
The absence of early planning and interaction represents one of the major difficulties in BREEAM assessments. If the BREEAM procedure is started too late in the project, there may be lost possibilities to maximise sustainability elements. Getting better ratings or certifications could be difficult if important sustainable design choices aren’t made early on.
Solution: Make certain that the project’s early phases incorporate BREEAM evaluations. Set objectives, identify important sustainability goals, and include pertinent methods in the development phase by collaborating early on with BREEAM assessors, environmental consultants, among stakeholders.
2. Limited Comprehension Of The BREEAM Standards:
A prevalent error is to not fully comprehend the BREEAM requirements & standards. It is possible to miss out on possibilities to obtain credits or reach certain sustainability goals due to misreading or insufficient understanding of BREEAM categories, credits, and standards of compliance.
Solution: Take the time to fully understand the project-specific BREEAM criteria. Collaborate effectively with BREEAM assessors or consultants with a wealth of knowledge who are well-verse in the evaluation process. Knowing sustainability standards and concepts may be improved by regular BREEAM training and workshops.
3. Neglecting To Record And Present Proof:
Inadequate record-keeping and proof to back up sustainability assertions might cause problems for the BREEAM assessments procedure. Missed credits or lower ratings could arise from inadequate or badly presented evidence supporting sustainable measures or BREEAM assessments.
Solution: The solution is to put in place reliable methods for recording environmentally friendly procedures and measures at every stage of the development project. Retain precise records, reports, and supporting materials to demonstrate adherence to BREEAM specifications. Frequently interact with BREEAM assessments assessors to comprehend evidence criteria and guarantee precise records.
4. Inadequate Sync Between Project Teams:
The effective execution of sustainability initiatives can be impe by inadequate collaboration and interaction across various project teams, comprising architects, engineers, contractors, and sustainability experts. Disjointed attempts and a lack of teamwork could cause disagreements or irregularities in meeting BREEAM assessments objectives.
Solution: Encourage project teams to work together by setting up frequent gatherings and conversations. Promote open lines of communication to guarantee adherence to sustainability objectives. From the project’s start, implement a coordinated approach to integrate environmentally friendly design concepts across multiple disciplines.
5. Ignoring Life-Cycle Assessment And Extended Sustainability:
One major mistake is to concentrate just on short-term sustainability initiatives without taking life-cycle analysis and long-term effects into account. Obtaining better BREEAM assessments ratings may be hamper by neglecting the long-term environmental effects or the life-cycle efficiency of construction supplies and systems.
Solution: Include life-cycle analysis in the sustainability plan for the project. Throughout the building’s life cycle, take into account how the materials, consumption of energy, maintenance needs, and operating effectiveness will affect the surroundings. Give top priority to tactics that support sustainability, energy economy, and robustness even after the building is complete.
Final Words
To avoid these typical BREEAM assessments errors, early planning, thorough comprehension, teamwork, and a long-term sustainability perspective are necessary. Stakeholders may successfully navigate the BREEAM assessments procedure. And achieve sustainable building results by tackling these obstacles early in the project lifecycle. And using a comprehensive approach to sustainability.