The shard building is an important infrastructural project and also a major tourist attraction center in London. The project was designed to be a vertical building rather than the tallest structure, and it comprises many floors occupied by offices, restaurants, and residential (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). It’s the largest building in the United Kingdom. It has boosted the transport sector in a more significant way. The report’s main idea is to write about the Shard project and provide all aspects and other background information related to the project.

Project Background

The Shard project is commonly known as the London Bridge Tower, which redefines the London skyline. It’s a 72- storey, situated near the London Bridge Station on the South Bank of the River Thames (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). The Shard project was a significant boost in ensuring that there is adequate infrastructure to respond to the urban vision of the London Mayor. The project has also encouraged the city’s high-density development and thus ensure there is a significant development. In line with realizing the city’s sustainable urban extension, the project will reduce traffic congestion. The worlds look better from 1014 feet and 87 storeys up, building the tallest building in Europe. It is one of the exciting projects that has ever been launched in the country and aims to ensure significant infrastructural development. The project construction began in March 2009, and an Italian conceptualized the project’s idea by the name of Architect Renzo Piano. The shard building vision was to design a vertical building rather than the tallest structure in the country. The building comprises of offices, residential, restaurants, and hotels.

Methodology

The methodology which will be adopted in the paper will include the following:

Primary data- all the secondary data gathered was supported by the primary research data and therefore enhanced a better understanding of the project. For instance, the reports have adopted a survey to gather all the information about the project.
Secondary data- a lot of information related to the project was collected by using secondary data sources. For instance, electronic documents and other newspapers detail all the project’s information and the key impacts that comprise the project. Also, there are peer-reviewed articles used in the report, ensuring sufficient details on the Shard project.

Project scope

Piano, the building’s principal designer, was inspired by the railway lines’ geometry, which was running past the site. It came with a sophisticated form of glazing features, which makes the building perfect for the structure. The building also blends into the sky and makes the building an ideal structure that came with all the project’s defined features. The management and construction of the Shard building in London are effectively managed, ensuring that the project was completed on time and met the designer’s initial design (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). The building’s cutting-edge design resembles the shard grass, which reflects London’s skyline in its exteriors and the alter colors based on the weather state in the area. The eight sloping glass façades, which are the “Shards,” help describe the building’s visual quality and shape. In this case, the splitting of the tower’s scale and reflecting the light is made randomly. The “fractures” openings between the shards help deliver a usual or natural ventilation to all the winter parks.

On the other hand, the extra-white glass used on the Shard enables the building to have a perfect sensitivity to the changing sky and lightness around it. The color of the Shard changes with the mood and therefore making the tower lightness brighter. For this lighting to be fair, it will require a specific technical solution that helps the façade’s performance when regulating the heat and light (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). Also, to note is that there is double- skin which is naturally ventilated façade with all the internal blinds, which makes it possible for the lights levels to be changed. The central theme outside the building is instrumental in keeping the solar gain and giving the best lightness. However, it’s important to note that the unprotected external blinds are not suitable for the tall tower. Therefore, there is a need to have an additional layer of the glass façade on the outside.

It is also important to note that several innovative methods were adopted in the project, making the project completed faster than such a project of the same nature. For instance, the project adopted the top-down construction approach, which was meant to ensure a sub and superstructure, which worked simultaneously (Chatham, 2011). It was the first time in which such a method was adopted to build the same height. A jump lift strategy where the construction of the shafts and other essential installation that its works continue way above the operational lift was the first time this concept was used in Europe.

Shard stakeholders

Stakeholders comprise of direct and indirect stakeholders of the Shard project. It can refer to the procedure of knowing all the individuals or organizations impacted by the project. A researcher is expected to gather all the information related to the extent of their participation, interest, and effect on the project’s success. The probability of project success is based on recognizing the prominent stakeholder, maintaining a good relationship with them, making decisions that meet their objectives, and leveraging the assets expected to achieve those objectives. The direct key stakeholders of the Shard project can be identified according to the type and circumstances. They include groups of investors such as Qataris, consultants, authority, designers, contractors, and suppliers (Whitworth, 2012). Other parties that influence the ShardShard’s decision included indirect stakeholders such as private and public organizations, environmental organizations, cultural, historical consideration, and owners. The consultant’s role in the project time was to represent the owners as an expe4rt partner in conducting the meetings with the other stakeholders and advising about the correct project path to the decision-makers.

Impact of the stakeholders

The crucial decision concerning the project was made in the earliest stages. When the stage was completed, it became a problem for the project manager to consider the account stakeholders’ claims, which were likely to affect the project’s outcome. The conclusions of the research stage of top institutional investment significantly affect the4 next stages of the investment project (Whitworth, 2012). The set up involves the viability step, along with planning and designing. Since the Shard project was unique opposite groups of stakeholders were not created before the project. However, they were created later as an outcome of the project. The secondary stakeholders take a lot of time to organize and manage their actions, gather resources, and extend their message when they were not formerly active. The resources, material, and non-material are essential in the activities of the stakeholders.

The global economic crisis in the year 20017 had a significant effect on the project, as the primary stakeholder changed in the pore construction phase. This caused a critical situation. This would have caused the project’s counseling, but new investors funded the project to begin again (Whitworth, 2012). The project’s success was facilitated by the excellent communication between the direct stakeholder, the owner, the consultant, and the project manager during the different stages, phases, and activities. There were effective communication and exchange of ideas that played a significant role in inventing innovation and techniques during the construction.

Project lice cycle

The red path in the diagram indicates the Shard project’s critical path during the construction and pre-construction stages between 2000 and 2013. A critical period was experienced in 2007 towards the end of the pre-construction stage at the worldwide recession. The pre-construction phase allowed the preparation to start constructing by all the involved parties in line with the authority (Ford & Friesl, 2019). The pre-construction phase practices involve foreseeing possible challenges and deciding on the possible remedies to lower the final project’s unnecessary costs. It begins early in the process and ends when the site of construction is prepared. This phase objective is to reduce the risks, overhead, and waste and increase reliability and productivity. This phase follows three sequential stages: design, preparation, design, tendering, and site preparation. This process’s primary activities include data collection, surveying, examination and testing, scheduling, planning communication contracts, and preparation of site before the construction phase commences. On the other hand, the construction phase starts after an agreement among the stakeholders to take materials on site and start building, which was in 2009 in the Shard case.

Project timeline

2000: A businessman Irvine Sellar based in London, decided to restore Southwark Towers using the 1970s model’s office block neighboring London Bridge Station. He met disapproval from the Deputy Prime Minister and local authorities by then.

2003: The Deputy Prime Minister approved the building, stating that the project met all the architectural construction standards.

2007: The project designers purchased the industrial lease from PricewaterhouseCoopers, and towers demolition arrangements were made.

2008: Consortium investors from Qatar saved the project, and demolishing of the Southwark Towers started in April and end at the beginning of 2009.

2009: The construction of the building begun in March.

2010: The concrete core went up gradually by about three meters daily.

2011: In early 2011, the core was completed, and the flooring commenced.

2012: The Structure was expected to be finished by May to be opened to the public by June (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012).

Project construction management

It is essential to stick to the status quo even when the stakeholders ask the business to deliver so much more with less. Building an iconic project with the time given requires one to adopt an innovative method with specialized expertise and ideas. The Shard building was accomplished by employing the following ideas and innovations.

Top-down construction strategy.

This approach enables the superstructure and substructure to be built at the same time. Projects with an underground basement are constructed by a bottom-up approach where the substructure and superstructure floors are built successively from the bottom to the superstructure’s top. The innovative top-down approach allowed the project manager to build the basement’s permanent structure members, together with the diggings from top to bottom (Chatham, 2011). In this scenario, the underground floors are built as the digging’s advances. This helped the Shard project to save overall construction time, which is an essential factor in building a project.

Jump lift

The shard project used Kone’s self-elevating lift during the construction. This was the first United Kingdom’s first jump lift installed in London during the Shard (Chatham, 2011). The self-climbing elevator system provided a substitute to outside hoists and improved the project’s safety and efficiency. The lift utilizes the building permanent lift shaft throughout the building stage and jumps in the shaft as the build goes up. The innovation enables lift installations and shaft building to remain at the advanced level while the lift functions in a similar shaft in the basement.

Continuous pour concrete or slip forming

This innovative method was utilized to improve the building program and decrease the risks. This approach involved jump-starting the steel structure and concrete core to enable the building above and below ground to start at the same time. The 250 meters core was slip-formed and started at underground (Whitworth, 2012). This was attained by dipping large steel box columns into a support pile directly below the core. The 5,500 meters cubed was the most massive single concrete pour to be undertaken in the United Kingdom. During the highest pour, trucks arrived on-site every two minutes. The project installed three pumps to pump up to 150 meters cubed in an hour to enable quick vehicle turnaround time. The concrete was poured in layers 750 millimeters deep.

United Kingdom’s tallest crane.

The crane was 317 m high when stretched completely and allowed constructors to construct the Shard project’s top 23 floors, which stands at about 244 meters. The machine raised 500 tons of steel and completed about 100 lifts in the process from its platform outside the building on floor 55 (Parker, 2013). Because of the limited space in the area, the project manager had the steel sections made in other areas and used the crane to lift the whole sections instead of lifting the 800 pieces of steel separately.

Off-site work

This type of construction raw materials is assembled and built at a shop then transported to the project construction site (Whitworth, 2012). This played an essential role during the lifecycle of the Shard project’s construction phase, resulting in its success.

For instance, during the construction, the floors were built from post-tensioned (PT) concrete slabs. This type of slab was thicker when compared with composite panel concrete. It also provides a high degree of fire protection and absorbs more sound (Whitworth, 2012). These PT concretes were the most appropriate because the hotel and residence needed better acoustic separation and less servicing. Furthermore, the PT slabs are lighter than the ordinally concrete hence they are thinner and can extend farther than the composite concrete. Applying these PT slabs allowed the project management to fit another two floors into the skyscraper area.

The upper spire of the skyscraper, 69 to 95, was constructed off-site and then taken the top of the tower. This is because there were fears of building safely without any delays in a place where winds can reach a speed of 100 miles per hour (Whitworth, 2012). The off-site approach helped save time and cost. It reduced the chances of accidents on the site because it allowed the project management to identify any difficulty or risk before the final assemble.

The shape of the Shard comprises eight shards that lean towards each other. These are made of two skin glass with a cavity between them. The external skin is made of two glazings. The double skin façade is well ventilated to reduce heat gain (Whitworth, 2012). It also has roller blinds in the cavities to improve the comfort zone and let in most natural daylight. The shard building has a system t5hat uses the extra heat produced in the workplace to heat hotel and apartment. Any excess heat produced by the system is expelled.

Construction Contract

The contract chosen was a JCT Standard Building Contract. This is because JCT seemed natural due to the many uncertainties around the project and the lengthy renegotiation. The company’s contracts are well known, familiar, and risks can be allocated fairly.

The comprehensiveness of SBC was an essential requirement because of the size and the client experience. According to Mace, the contractor, this company was the best because the contract was expected to have a proven history, strong background, and one that could offer a vital default position. This was a suitable method of apportioning the risks outlined in the project among the parties.

Another advantage offered by the SBC was flexibility. The client had done much with the design team; therefore, using the contract with a Contractors Design Portion implied that various elements could be given to the contractor to complete with the client to keep the total control of the project design.

Risk management

This is a systematic method of looking at-risk areas and determining ways of dealing with search risks. The object of this is to know the source of risk and uncertainty by determining their effect and come up with suitable management response. Managing the risk in the early stages is crucial to attaining the project’s objectives, such as time, cost, environmental sustainability, and safety (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). Risk can occur either during construction or pre-construction. There is no risk-free project; however, they can be managed, shared, minimized, transferred, or accepted. During pre-construction, the risk factors’ awareness results in whether to go ahead with the project, especially if there is a chance of the project finishing late or going over the budgeted cost.

Various factors, such as the economic situation, historical location, standards, and limitations, existing technology had a significant effect on the Shard project’s decisions. Various risks were identified and their importance (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). It was also stated that the risk would occur in the entire life of the project. Even though the risk is more significant in different stages, the pre-construction phase was the riskiest.

Financial risk

Early in the last decade, the 2007 global economic crisis caused an unstable situation, which significantly affected a project’s risk factor. This resulted in strict limitations that influenced the project (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). For instance, there were changes in the investors due to this global crisis. This would have caused the project to stop if the risk was not managed.

Operational risks

Because of the Shard project’s importance and surrounding historical buildings, the project management adopted some unique techniques such as off-site work to prevent any negative impact (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). The project management also applied continuous check on the process flows to avoid any delay in the project.

Hazard risks

The objective of the Environment Health Officer of the project is to deal with any adverse effect on the surrounding area, such as noise, by coming up with an immediate solution (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). The vibration can be a big concern to the historical building and was dealt with by applying new methods.

Benefits of Risk analysis of the Shard project

Working in a team enables problem-solving in a non-adversarial relationship. The Shard project surprises were minimized financially, structurally, and environmentally because the team and stakeholders managed the pre-construction phase (Parker, Sharratt & Richmond, 2012). There were no delays in the project since the management provided a centralized and seamless control from the start to completion.

Environmental Sustainability

The Shard’s stakeholder has gone the extra mile to enable the building to be sensitive to the environment on both the global and local levels. From the beginning, the project management set strict targets to minimize the effect on the immediate environment and maximize energy efficiency (Whitworth, 2012). The Shard project can be seen as a trendsetter in London, creating business development because it can support such iconic buildings’ long-term sustainability.

The shard project is also the most environmentally friendly building in the UK. This is because it reduces energy consumption by 30 percent (Whitworth, 2012). The design of the project was assessed using the Building Research Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM). This method provided procedures for reducing the negative impacts of buildings on local and global environments and promote a comfortable and healthy interior atmosphere. The research results gave a clear picture of the project’s environmental effect.

The building has been able to classify itself as a visually remarkable addition to the London skyline. The Shard continues to advance the city’s reputation for modern, socially responsible, and environmentally friendly building (Whitworth, 2012). The building also helps generate income to the south of the River and acts as a benchmark for future growths.

Failure of the project

According to Hillel, the Shard project is hindered by its location, as most of the 72 storeys are still empty. The building was financed by most of the world’s wealthiest individuals, the Qataris, but they did not note that location is an essential requirement for success in the United Kingdom property market (Hillel, 2014). The Shards observation area can be accessed for 25 pounds an hour, less than that of the London Eye 30 pound for half-hour rotation. The Shard project is popular, but it is not mobbed as compared to the London Eye.

Selling a home in the Shard project also proves to be difficult. The building was built to include two-story duplexes and seven single-storey rooms on 53 to 65 floors. When the building was completed, the creator set 50 million pounds for the duplex located 735 feet up in the sky (Hillel, 2014). This is something to amuse guests considering it is the highest residence between Russia’s Ural Mountains and London, 200 miles east, but it does not get over the primary problem. An individual coming from the luxury building ends up in a grimy, gritty area of a central London commuter station and none salubrious local areas.

It is not logical that a person can terminate the luxurious mansions in places like Kensington and Mayfair and their attractive streets, top restaurants, and designer shop and spend a lot of money buying a property at Shard (Hillel, 2014).

Residents of the Shard are given access to amenities of the Shangri-La’s Hotel, such as dedicated high-speed lifts and a swimming pool on the 52^nd floor (Hillel, 2014). But residents of other London luxury property have private swimming pools, and they do not need high-speed lifts to take them to the ground floor front door and garden.

The problem of the Shard building standing empty can be solved by the investors Qataris compromising on the price. There are other luxurious places in London that the buyers can opt to go to; thus, reducing the property’s price will ensure that many properties are sold. The building is also surrounded by grimy, gritty areas of a central London commuter station, and none salubrious local areas, thereby making the building less favorable than other luxurious property (Hillel, 2014). Compromising on the price will tempt individuals to purchase the property, and considering the building’s location will prove beneficial in the long run. For instance, the building would not stand empty if it was located in areas such as Knightsbridge.

There is also a failure of imagination. The Shard project should have something that the community members use every day rather than just walking around the building. For instance, the building should have a library in it. The Shard project is significant and should be linked to local outcomes (Booth, 2011). The building lacks this, which shows that developers could not connect an iconic project like this to local outcomes. This failure can be avoided by making sure that a big project has something that society uses regularly. This will allow many people to access the building rather than passing it.

According to critics, Renzo Piano’s work in London is a failure. This is because he left his delicate sense of scale and space during the Shard designing. It appears that he departed from the civilized standards that one can relate to his architecture. For instance, in Houston, the Menil Foundation is an excellent work of Renzo design. The low-slung art gallery can be idealized (Jones, 2012). The project creates a contemplative, soothing space inside because it white and calm outside. It combines attractively with the glass forest building at the center of Houston. The project is ecologically essential as it tries to renew the area surrounding it.

In Genoa, Italy, Renzo Piano has also designed buildings in the Riviera city’s old harbor. This is considered one of the most incredible aquariums globally, a pleasing succession of spaces best to the sea (Jones, 2012). The place ensured that octopuses and sharks have a beautiful home. Aquariums are mostly claustrophobic and dark, but the Renzo project is large and light and makes a rich, yet infuriating encounter between individuals and nature.

Renzo Piano’s purpose is to recover a neglected waterfront by bringing back old buildings and adding his designs, including an environment and an octopus-like branching viewing tower. The architect has a sensational project in Genoa, his home city, but there is no overwhelming skyscraper in the city’s heart. His innovative building in Genoa is intentional, invisible from the town’s closely constructed and atmospheric medieval and baroque heart (Jones, 2012). One can pass through the small streets of white and black areas, down the port to see his projects. Renzo Piano is seen more in Houston and Genoa as a designer who builds sympathy for its atmosphere and fabric.

It would be absurd if Genoa allowed Renzo to design something arrogant and out of scale, such as the Shard project in the center of a historic area (Jones, 2012). Renzo designs for people, not for money and power in his home town. London allowed him to go against his own rules, which have long term consequences.

Challenges faced

The construction of the project faced some of the challenges. For instance, the delivery of raw materials was in the middle of a busy city. However, reports suggest that despite this, the construction process was outlined at the time. This is because it comprised over 36 hours, employing about 700 lorry loads which arrived after every two minutes. This allowed the project team to pour about 5,400 cubic meters of concrete that largest to be poured by a London building. Another challenge experienced is high profile public inquiry and lengthy planning process. Finally, the global economic crisis in the year 20017 had a significant effect on the project, as the primary stakeholder changed in the pre-construction phase. This was a challenge as it caused a critical situation. The global crisis would have caused the project’s counseling, but new investors funded the project to begin again.

Conclusion

The Shard building was contracted from 2009 to 2012. The building is the second largest building in London, with a height of about 310 meters. The project life cycle followed two major lifecycles, which included the pre-construction and construction phase. A critical period was experienced in 2007 towards the end of the pre-construction stage at the worldwide recession. The pre-construction phase allowed the preparation to start constructing by all the involved parties in line with the authority. The pre-construction phase practices involve foreseeing possible challenges and deciding on the possible remedies to lower the final project’s unnecessary costs. The construction phase starts after an agreement among the stakeholders to take materials on site and start building, which was in 2009 in the Shard case.

Hillel (2014) claims that the Shard project failed because most of the rooms were not occupied. This is as a result of the location of the building. The Shard is located in a grimy, gritty area of a central London commuter station and none salubrious local areas. Individuals would prefer purchasing a property in other areas such as Kensington, which have attractive streets and have top restaurants and designer shops. The problem of empty rooms can be solved by compromising on the price. It is not rational that an individual can dismiss the luxurious mansions in other places to buy Shard overpriced property.

Also, there is a belief that there was a failure of imagination during the construction of the Shard building. It is believed that big project and should be linked to local outcomes. The Shard project should have something that the community members use daily rather than just walking around it. For instance, the developer ought to have included something like a library that can be accessed by many people. This problem can be avoided by ensuring that the project is linked with local outcomes to ensure many people access the building.

Despite these failures, I still feel that the Shard project was a success. For instance, the building has created job opportunities for many individuals. People training as beauticians can work in the hotel’s spa, as fitness coaches for the gym, secretaries, shop assistance, florist, managers, and security guards. The building has also become the current landmark in London, attracting many people around the world. The building presence makes it obvious that the fastest way to get to the City from Westminster is through South Bank. Finally, the project is also the greatest environmentally friendly building in London. This is because it reduces energy consumption by 30 percent. It essential to consider the impact of the project on the environment to consider the Shard project a success.

I believe that the project was well managed because it was completed within its timeline. This is a result of innovative thinking and expertise. For instance, the Shard adopted a top-down building strategy. This structure enables the substructure and superstructure to be built at once, thereby saving overall construction time. The construction of the project faced some of the challenges. For instance, the delivery of raw materials was in the middle of a busy city. However, reports suggest that despite this, the construction process was outlined at the time. This is because it comprised over 36 hours, employing about 700 lorry loads which arrived after every two minutes. This allowed the project team to pour about 5,400 cubic meters of concrete that largest to be pored by a London building. Another challenge experienced is high profile public inquiry and lengthy planning process. Finally, the global economic crisis in the year 20017 had a significant effect on the project, as the primary stakeholder changed in the pre-construction phase. This was a challenge as it caused a critical situation. The global crisis would have caused the project’s counseling, but new investors funded the project to begin again.

Reference

Booth, R. (2011). London’s Shard: a ‘tower of power and riches’ looking down on poverty. The Guardian. Retrieved 2 October 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/dec/30/shard-of-glass-london.

Chatham, J. (2011). KONE Jump Lifts Installed in the Shard. Elevator World, 3, 79-82.

Ford, C. J., & Friesl, M. (2019). Abseiling from The Shard: The Cognitive Foundations of Capability Development in Temporary Organizations. European Management Review, 16(3), 507-523.

Hillel, M. (2014). Why the Shard stands proud – but empty. Independent.co.uk. Retrieved 2 October 2020, from https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/why-shard-stands-proud-empty-9088155.html.

Jones, J. (2012). Art Critic Explains Why London’s Shard Is A Failure. Business Insider. Retrieved 2 October 2020, from https://www.businessinsider.com/art-critic-explains-why-londons-shard-is-a-failure-2012-8?IR=T.

Parker, J. (2013, May). Engineering the Shard, London: tallest building in western Europe. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Civil Engineering (Vol. 166, No. 2, pp. 66-73). Thomas Telford Ltd.

Parker, J., Sharratt, M., & Richmond, J. (2012, September). The Shard, London, UK: response of arches to ground movements. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Bridge Engineering (Vol. 165, No. 3, pp. 185-194). Thomas Telford Ltd.

Whitworth, J. (2012). The Shard: London’s New Skyline. Reporter, 67.