roundtable


reduced from one person to 12.5 sq m to 9.6 sq m – landlords still had to attract tenants, he explained.


Chandler suggested letting trends and fresh commercial models were evolving through growing mixed-use restyling of outdated office premises.


For many landlords a ‘build it, and they will come’ leap of faith was required, said Stamatis, although landlord/developers like Landid and Brockton Capital were already championing agile design. Market value, demand and supply, is driven by entrepreneurial leadership, he noted. “If people back change, and things take off, then others follow.”


Roundtablers noted that agile design could add property value, occupier interest, and accelerate letting, but it also needed to be a commercially viable concept.


Can existing buildings take the evolutionary strain?


Stevens felt technology within buildings was at a barrier. Changing current technologies to enable innovative workspace might be uneconomical.


Some buildings could not physically take radical refurbishment or extension, added York.


The rising density of building use created by agile working could place extra demand on M&E infrastructure for desk-space locations, along with transportation issues such as parking, noted Finnis.


Stamatis pointed out that innovative workplaces are being successfully created for larger workforces than buildings were originally designed.


Mixed-use town-centre redevelopments of obsolete office premises helped to de-risk the projects for developers, while providing offices, accommodation and nearby leisure and retail amenities, noted Head and York.


Though 90% of M4 western corridor office stock is over 10 years old, its replacement rate is phenomenally low, stated Finnis. Providing flexible dynamic buildings is challenging. “Building speculative space carries risk and refurbishment is also expensive if you want to create the right environments to attract tenants.”


What should landlords provide – ‘Shell & Core’ or Cat A?…


York highlighted the market dilemma: “Do landlords with returning leased properties go for traditional office design or an exposed services concept?


Exposed services currently lets quicker than conventional space, Chandler mentioned.


Finnis quoted British Council for Offices design guidelines advising more flexibility.


Head recalled the office market 20 years ago debating ‘shell and core’ or full Cat A construction. “That market never really embraced ‘shell and core’, but with today’s technology usage and the need to attract wide-ranging occupiers it may be something to think about again.”


Stevens revealed that a number of years ago it was necessary to acquire premises in Belfast. It was a shock that most offices we viewed were ‘shell and core’ meaning significantly more work was required to be ready for occupation. This was not what we were used to.


Chandler felt Cat A development needed careful consideration, particularly with more occupying tenants making investments in agile technology. With shorter leases now prevalent, would occupiers make those investments within Cat A buildings? Exit costs would also be examined, maybe leading to more movable assets, pop-up offices and even zero delapse.


Prospective occupiers need imagination with ‘shell and core’ developments, noted Finnis. Selling was easier with in-place infrastructure rather than CGIs, York agreed.


Six month lead-times for Cat A and Cat B fit- out delivery were not market-friendly, Finnis added.


Chandler suggested landlords might become change facilitators – offering pre-designed fit-out options, pre-agreed landlord capital contributions, and contractors ready for call- off work.


Finnis felt provision of basic IT, with imbedded WiFi, would help. “To have that for occupiers at day one would make such a difference.”


Chandler agreed that long delays in getting suitable technology infrastructure, both to and within buildings, can be a determining letting factor.


Any landlord-provided Cat A work needs to be sufficiently flexible to enable an agile working approach, stressed Finnis.


… or ‘core and flex-space’, plus offsite amenities?


Stamatis reported how US corporates now utilise WeWork co-working spaces as regional offices. Others adopt a ‘core and flex’ strategy taking 100,000 sq ft, but leasing only 80,000 sq.ft, and using the remainder – landlord- provided as flex-space – for co-working and potential growth.


With landlords loathe to have unlet space, Finnis said the UK property market needed more serviced office operators to provide flexible swing-space beyond agile occupiers’ leased requirements.


York suggested business parks might provide such flexible space.


Stamatis felt that the role of modern landlords THE BUSINESS MAGAZINE – THAMES VALLEY – FEBRUARY 2017 Peter Laurie businessmag.co.uk 39 Simon Fryer


was converting from building owners to owner-managers providing attractive well- run amenities linked to their buildings.


Meredith: “We are doing that successfully at One Queen Caroline in London with its rooftop amenity. Plus it gives the landlord recognition, and bolsters our Cat A appeal.”


Head highlighted the vital importance of amenity provision within traditional business parks allied to management control. He cited Winnersh Park and Green Park as successful examples.


Both have single ownership landlords Finnis noted: “Amenity is changing. A rounded provision is now needed, from hotels to yoga.”


Stephen Head


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44