No medals for underpricing

With regard to one recent ill-fated first-off-the-blocks swimming pool project - the Zaha Hadid-designed Olympic pool for London 2012 whose budget is reported to be on the rise - here we go again. Why do we put this industry in the firing line time after time on major schemes as far as the final costs are concerned?

I would agree with most commentators regarding the relatively small impact of high profile projects in the industry over the period between now and 2012. Even when you include Crossrail, the Channel Tunnel Link and the finalisation of Terminal 5, they currently only amount to about 1.5% of total building activity in the Southeast, albeit with a skill-drain effect at critical points during the period.

However, what concerns me is what happens if these projects overrun, due to bad planning. Such major schemes could easily eat up between 3-4% of building works activity. If they do, they will set in motion a chain reaction which goes to the heart of the whole property process. When coupled with the awful skills shortage we are suffering, the impact of this will probably become much worse.

We are very fortunate to be staging the games in 2012 and Sebastian Coe and his team have done a great job. The appointment of Jack Lemley, who ran the Anglo-French group that designed and built the Channel Tunnel, to head the new Olympic Delivery Authority seems a sensible option, but it is my guess that the only people he talks to will be the big guys, because of their "track record'' - excuse the pun.

I believe that there is no track record for something like this. What we must do is build facilities that have a life well beyond the glitter of 2012 and that provide the local communities around them with sustainable and maintainable amenities for many years to come.

I am calling for all members of the industry to get real with the numbers now, identify and manage the risks and plan accordingly... say ‘no’ when an unrealistic and unaffordable scheme presents itself

That's why I am calling for all members of the industry to get real with the numbers now, identify and manage the risks and plan accordingly. When present at design team meetings for the various fabulous Olympic schemes, my advice would be to say ‘no' when an unrealistic and unaffordable scheme presents itself.

Stop thinking iconic and start employing some of the many excellent architectural firms who can actually deliver what they design rather than the so called ‘signature' architects who, more often than not, throw the baby out with the bath water when cost and buildability get in their way.

My advice to the Olympic delivery teams would be to visit Terminal 5 where, for the most part, they have got it right for once.