On something rotten – in and out of landfill

Something smells rotten in the state of Denmark, but also in another important seat of power – our CBDs where our corporate lions run most of our modern economy, not to mention influence our politics.

It’s the defit disgrace.

According to a rising number of voices, we are once again tossing perfectly good office equipment and furniture to landfill.

Sometimes worth $5 million we hear. And that’s before the demands to replace the end of trip facilities installed just a few short years ago.

There are any number of excuses.

Blame the desperate efforts of landlords to lure tenants back to the office. Or the desperate efforts of tenants to lure their staff back with luxe fitouts that would make a prince blush.

In short, the tenants have got the landlords over a barrel. The problem we heard at our Electro-Retrofit masterclass at Greenhouse in July, is that this is draining the capex (capital expenditure) from the landlords’ funds so by the time 2030 comes around, by which time the green lease says the building needs to be electrified, there’s no money left. Oops.

And this despite the enormous effort in the past by so many well-meaning people who tried to break the cycle of waste.

This includes The Fifth Estate when in our early days we published nine – yes nine – ebooks to step people through ways to improve the outcomes, with huge input and support from the Better Buildings Partnership and the City of Sydney.

Check out the Tenants and Landlords Guide to Happiness.

Right now, we are pretty well back to the prehistoric era, metaphorically speaking.

Not with all. Not with a few stand out hero landlords but in way too many cases, judging from the noises and taps on the shoulder we are getting.

Our research found it was a human communication problem not a physical barrier that prevented good useful recycling.

And we do have to say that since then, recycled furniture places have mushroomed and some even turn away items because they’ve got too many.

Which is why so many people are surprised at what’s going on at the top end of tenancy (we haven’t checked the more modest levels yet.)

Partly to blame now are the massive lease incentives that plump up the face rent for the landlords so their valuation doesn’t plummet. It goes like this – the tenant agrees to pay a nice high rent then gets most of it back in incentives or kickbacks but the investor only gets to see the official or “face rent”. Neat trick, huh?

But also to blame then as now we suspect are the lawyers who go through any loopholes that might leave their client, tenant or landlord exposed to pesky green obligations and mess up the so called liquidity of the deal (easy in and out, no complications).

But even worse we hear are the tenant reps who claim a very generous commission on the deal.

So out they went in those days, to hungry rumbling trucks waiting on the curb side in the transition period from when legal responsibility moves from the tenant to the landlord.

This included cabling (which might be high voltage) equipment, computers, Aeron chairs (up to $1000 in those days), not to mention desks and partitions.

BVN launches an office defit guide

At an event at architects BVN on Wednesday last week in Sydney we heard in greater detail what was going on and the new efforts to redress the mess.

It’s not just defit that’s a problem the speakers said, it’s also construction waste.

The occasion was the launch of The Commercial Office De-Fit Guidelines.

 “A commercial fitout at the end of a lease, is one of the least visible, yet most wasteful stages in the life of a building. It’s also one of the most significant opportunities in our transition to a circular economy,” said studio principal Sally Campbell.

Speaking on a panel were: Paul Rosenberg Vella, cofounder and director of Revert Group; Jade Nicholson, project manager at Multiplex, BVN’s practice director, Amelia Lipa and regenerative lead Adrian Taylor; and Ritchie Djamhur, founder of Superyard.

Campbell said the key was to consider all possibilities, with landfill the very last on the list. So questions around an object  that’s under scrutiny might be: What if we just keep it here? What if we do nothing and leave it as is? Could we refurbish this? Does it need new paint? Or a bit of repair?

Designers clearly play a key role – or should, right from the start.

“Ultimately, it takes a village,” she said. “It takes everyone in the industry to really make this happen. Getting everyone involved early is essential.”

Rosenberg Vella, said his business emerged on the back of the defit experience, where most materials were ending up in landfill.

The company was designed to “create material pathways in the commercial fitout and asset repositioning sector, and upcycle those materials and support the industry to achieve those recycling and upcycling outcomes”

He said early connection between the different phases of a project were critical to improved outcomes. A standout success he said was a project for Bendigo Bank at 555 Collins Street Melbourne, where components were recycled or upcycled.

But the waste goes much further than fitout. In construction it’s sometimes an enormous number.

Jade Nicholson said: “We generate so much waste on site. There is so much. In some respect, it can be almost astronomical what comes out.”

But salvaging items such as fortress fencing, “which is the fencing that you put up around edge protection … can cost more time and more money, more labor, more materials handling, to sort it, to move it, to store it, than it would just to put it in the bin.”

That’s the brutal reality that confronts a lot of project managers whether in defit or construction. It’s always the logistics of moving items out in a short time frame, we’ve heard on multiple occasions.

Nicholson said: “There will always be an excess of materials that are ordered, the “what if,” the “just in case.” Again, it would cost us more money, time, storage, labor, to sort it, to store it somewhere, rather than just putting it in the bin. It happens every day on construction sites.”

The ingrained practice of using project “spares” is a tough one to overcome, she said.

Ritchie Djamhur said he had been a retailer but “I took my marketplace retail hat and applied it to construction because I was disgusted and amazed and in awe, in a bad way, about how much waste comes out of any particular project.”

Connecting the waste with people who want to re-use it was key to his new business but in effect this is a marketplace that has to be balanced between buyers and sellers.

But the hoarding, “just in case” mentality did not bode well. In the end he created a realistic platform for the business by tapping event organisers.

“Out of the materials that came out, we’ve given away over 30,000 kilos of carpet, LVL, and ply timber to over 20 different organisations.”

“We did a project with Mirvac where they did a townhouse development in Melbourne and gave away materials there as well. So that’s been a great journey.”

With a long road still to come.