Serviced the car recently? What about your building?

The first thing to acknowledge is that large numbers of Landlords and occupiers are very good at understanding their property assets and actively manage the maintenance of them. However, for some, the need to reduce the risk of reactive maintenance, or to assist in planning forward budgets, sinking funds and capital project needs, means a lot of building stock would almost certainly benefit from Planned Preventative Maintenance (PPM) and Lifecycle Costing Assessments. There will always be a need for some reactive responses, but a more proactive planned maintenance strategy for our buildings, component parts, mechanical plant and services will reduce the peaks and troughs of those reactive repairs and consequential costs.


Planned Preventative Maintenance (PPM)
To assess the maintenance requirements of an asset over an agreed period of time (these can range from up to 5 years and over 30 year cost projection) in order to enable a budget to be set and a structured plan for maintenance to be developed and implemented. (source: RICS guidance note)


Lifecycle Costing
Methodology for the systematic economic evaluation of life cycle costs over a period of analysis, as defined in the agreed scope. (source: RICS guidance note). Or more simply…to assess the condition of existing plant, components and structures and to review their life expectancy before replacement is needed and then to review this against actual wear and tear.

Subtle differences exist between PPM and Lifecycle Costing, but both can be powerful tools to understanding existing building stock and planning the essential upkeep and improvement of assets. Whereas a PPM may be more appropriate for assessing existing building stock and its maintenance requirements over a set period, a Lifecycle Costing will take a more holistic view, considering product economic lifespans and the buildings’ whole lifecycle. A Lifecycle document is a live document for the life of the building and should be regularly updated (say every two years). Elements, components and plant can be reviewed against actual wear and the need for replacement or repair amended accordingly. This then feeds back into the PPM report where budgets can be adjusted. With the increasing use of BIM and greater government emphasis, PPM and Lifecycle Costing should be a consideration from Day One of any project completion and moreover actually implemented from Day One.


So what are the barriers?

  • Some owners and occupiers do not proactively manage the maintenance and upkeep of buildings on grounds of cost or belief that everything is the responsibility of a Tenant.
  • PPM reports are too standardised and generic and say very little.
  • PPMs and Lifecycle Costing Assessments are considered ‘one-off’ surveys and not followed up at regular intervals/reviewed. Without regular review these surveys are a waste.

Aston Rose offers tailored, building specific maintenance and Lifecycle Costing advice, developed from the asset management strategy for each building. It is absolutely key to understand the management strategy, whether that be disposal, major refurbishment, development or retention to then be able to build advice.

We believe this is an expanding and technological advancing sector and is why we have invested resources into this area.


Some key principles

  • Examining the building’s needs and long term strategy.
  • Understanding budgets and available funds.
  • Scrutinising the wider operation of the building and opportunities for improvements.
  • Whole life component assessments versus actual wear and tear.
  • Lifecycle costs linked to service charge budgets to help establish Sinking or Reserve funds.
  • Delivering information the client and building users can use.
  • Ongoing assessment and analysis, through retained surveyor roles.


Colin Townsend Green and Andy Lynch

would be more than happy to discuss this matter with you further.