With the advent of the separation of ownership and operation of a hospitality property there is a case for the design of a property Design
53 ● ● ● ● ●
to be considered on a more long-term basis. Differing property use values are not static and a location’s use value may change.
Many examples exist where offices have been converted into hotels when letting values for office space in their area have fallen. As the process of construction continues to change from skill based techniques to more pre-manufactured methods, designers will have the opportunity to design more flexibility into the built form.
Initially, incorporating such flexibility will entail a higher capital cost. However, if such additional cost can be contained as a small percentage of the overall cost, the long-term benefit to the owner, being able to change the operational use of the building at a low cost, could enhance the overall returns on the building over its planned lifecycle. One of the constraints on raising finance for hotel development has historically been its single use option and very limited scope for change. In the past, this was the case for offices.
Now they are designed with a view to providing flexibility. The essential requirement is the ability easily to change location access to power or information technology configurations and provision of lighting, air conditioning and internal space separation. If such adaptability were provided for water and waste services, while the same building techniques for the other building services were applied, a building form with multi-use options at a low cost for change would change the financial criteria for the property investor.
● ● ● ● ●
Illustration 3.3
‘The discerning customer’
(Courtesy of Michael Winner, Photograph, Terry O’Neill)
For the operator, the need to change the physical product is also proving more essential now, as the customer becomes more demanding in aspirations for experiencing newer products. For example, in the restaurant sector, there has been a reduction in the mainstream product lifecycle. The impact of this is that return on investment now has to be measured over a shorter period with a subsequent increase in risk. If this trend continues and extends into the hotel sector, where the initial investment is far greater, its impact on the mainstream market could prove to be even more dramatic, unless, of course the flexibility of the building form is enhanced.
Similar pressure exists in the developed countries as a conse-quence of the reducing land resource available for development in the main areas of demand. The lack of penetration of the limited service or budget hotels into city centre locations due to the high entry cost demonstrates this. As does the fact that many mid-market hotels are now renovated, and repositioned as a superior product despite the high cost of refurbishment. However, trading up the product is a finite option in most locations and does not satisfy the demand in the mid-market sector, which is the largest segment of the industry. Consolidation and acquisition of the product available by the major groups and brands with only minor refur-bishment to satisfy brand standards may provide a short-term solution for under-performing product and brand representation.
However, it does not increase available stock. As demand is fore-cast to increase, the issues will be resolved by way of more flexible building form or the nature of the product. The latter may be driven by the nature of property investment and development, which is moving more to the development of multi-use buildings, occa-sioned by a need to maximize the value of a property in particular locations. Such development trends pose challenges for developer, owner and operator alike. All of this will require the designer to respond to more complex issues in future.
As the ownership structure of the hospitality industry adapts in terms of ownership and its nature alters in terms of operations, so have design and construction industries changed. The aspects of change in the construction industry are covered in detail in Chapter 9. For the design industry, change appears to be about reverting back to its roots. In the early part of the last century, architects, for instance, were only responsible for design, the imple-mentation and realization of the building being the skills provided by others. Traditionally the great Victorian architects concerned themselves with the aesthetics of the building design leaving the master builder to realize personal aspirations and those of the owners. As the volume and scope of building increased through industrialization, the architect’s role was extended to maintain control and status. This role was extended to manage the delivery of the building as designed, by adding the management of the building process to service provision. Thus, the architect/designer Design
55 ● ● ● ● ●
gained authority over the process. Sensibly for them, because such authority was not linked with responsibility, at least not in a contractual way. This was achieved by diversifying the role into separate professions, namely quantity surveying, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering and later a host of other specialists including interior and landscape designers to name but two. This resulted in major projects having up to twenty dif-ferent consultants all working under the direction and coordination of the architect. Not trained as managers it was not surprising that in the 1980s, architects having failed fully to satisfy clients’
requirements lost managerial control, responsibility of which was taken over by the project manager. Similarly, construction com-panies moved into the provision of design and build construction management or ‘turn key’ as it is known in the USA. This came about because the companies attempted to address the issues by way of a management contract form and realized that manage-ment without authority could not produce the required results, While the benefits and weaknesses of the varying methods of construction, particularly those which deliver the best in terms of quality, time and cost, are still being debated, it is interesting to note that the architectural and design schools are expending more time on the teaching of the theories of design rather than the management of the process of construction. Similarly, as the meth-ods of construction continue to change from skill to manufacture based systems the larger international construction companies who have the resources to invest in development, but require a secure work flow have moved into partnering. This involves the supplier and procurer entering into longer-term agreements to develop multiple units in varying locations. By simplifying the management structure of the design and construction process, such partnerships seem to be delivering more and more projects in var-ious industry sectors including hospitality. Perhaps it will prove to be partnering or a similar process that will evolve to embody the change in design and construction in the twenty-first century.
The fact that the UK recorded its highest temperature ever (over 100°F) on 10 August 2003 may not be confirmation that the global climate is changing. However, it does have an impact on the UK hotel industry. While in the past air conditioning was an option, now it is a basic requirement in hotel facilities. Climate change and the environment will inevitably impact on the design and cost of hospitality property in many different ways, including the nature of the building shell, the management of the internal environment, the cost and availability of utilities and consequently the nature of operational services and facilities. Consumer demand for environmentally considered products is growing as is national legislation in certain parts of the world and some predict it will eventually impact on our ability to travel at will. Whatever tran-spires in this regard designers, builders, developers, owners and operators will undoubtedly be challenged to address the complex
● ● ● ● ●
issues of the environment, flexibility, multi-use buildings and the separation of ownership and operations in a more competitive marketplace in the future.
Conclusion
In this chapter, it has been suggested that the role of the designer is to work with the hospitality client to develop a final product that meets the needs of the client and satisfies the consumer. A balance must be struck between factors such as image, style, oper-ating efficiency and customer comfort, and between aesthetics and practicalities. The external design of hospitality properties must be practical and appealing, while internal design should make the best use of the space available. The designer is respon-sible for planning the space available and for filling it with suitable furnishings and fittings, so that the flow of people and materials is facilitated. Design is, however, affected by factors such as com-pany policy, location, budgets and logistics, and a good designer needs to be aware of such considerations. The design of bedroom accommodation requires more attention to tangible factors than food and beverage facilities, where there is more of a requirement to create an environment in which to enjoy the dining experience.
Design may be regarded as a sequential process from concept to implementation, and the design brief is a key document in which the project objectives and parameters are set out. The briefing docu-ment should be clear and concise. Its length will depend upon the extent to which the hospitality product needs to be branded.
Design proposals should be evaluated objectively, with special care taken in how the new product should be marketed. Hospitality products, like any other product, must be carefully packaged so that they appeal to the consumer’s senses and add to the experi-ence. Any development project is affected by the critical factors of time, cost and quality, and hospitality projects are no exception.
There may even be greater complexity if the unit is required to continue trading while the project is completed. In recent years, projects have increasingly be assessed by the return on investment, and it is the task of the hospitality design team to develop new schemes that may achieve this aim
As Rutes et al. (1985) remark:
Perhaps the most basic difficulty for the neophyte hotel designer is learning that hotel operation must earn a profit out of its building… In a hotel you are both leasing to the public every night and catering to their every need.
Therefore, rather than a monument or mere rental space, a hotel must provide a total living environment, with all the needed multicomplex functions and activities.
It is likely that this complex format will be further challenged in the immediate future by the separation of ownership and operations, Design
57 ● ● ● ● ●
environmental considerations and the greater need for the product to be flexible to adapt to the changing aspirations of the consumer.
References
Oxford University Press (1971) The Compact Edition of Oxford English Dictionary, Book Club Associates, OUP, Oxford, p. 698.
The Oxford Paperback Dictionary (1988), Hawkins, J.M. (compiler), Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 218.
Rutes W.A., Penner, R.H. and Adams L. (2001) Hotel Design, Planning, and Development, W.W. Norton, New York.
Review questions
1 What are the designer’s main responsibilities?
2 Explain how sensory responses affect design.
3 Outline some of the factors which will affect future design trends.
● ● ● ● ●