General Archives

6 Main External Wall Systems in the UK and the Fire Risks of Each

Cladding provides protection and insulation for buildings, but the choice of materials can significantly affect fire safety. Here’s a summary of the main types of cladding used in the UK and the fire risks they may pose.

This can be a very complicated subject because, while the external-facing material may be non-combustible, there is often a significant build-up of support structure and insulation behind it that may contain combustible materials or missing cavity barriers.

If in doubt, consult a competent advisor to help assess your external wall.

1. Aluminium Cladding

Description:

Aluminium cladding is a commonly used system used on high-rise and commercial buildings due to its sleek appearance and durability. It typically consists of formed aluminium panels or sheets that are installed onto an insulated backing structure.

Risk of Combustibility:

Aluminium cladding is typically considered to be non-combustible however the actual material used needs to be considered carefully. Some aluminium cladding panels are made from ACM (Aluminium Composite Material) which consists of two thin aluminium layers surrounding a core, often made of polyethylene (PE).

The core material of ACM, if made from PE, is highly combustible and can contribute to rapid fire spread. The outer aluminium is non-combustible, but the flammable core was a key factor in the Grenfell Tower fire. Post-Grenfell regulations now restrict the use of PE cores in high-rise buildings, but many older buildings still contain ACM with combustible cores.

The backing materials should also be understood. Behind aluminium cladding there may be combustible insulation, timber sheathing boards/framing and missing cavity barriers.

2. Render and External Wall Insulation (EWI)

Description:

EWI consists of an insulating material, like expanded polystyrene (EPS) or mineral wool, applied to the exterior of buildings and covered with render. It is commonly used in refurbishment projects to improve the thermal performance of a wall.

Risk of Combustibility:

EPS is highly flammable, and if exposed to fire, it can cause flames to spread rapidly. While some EWI systems use non-combustible insulation like mineral wool, older buildings with EPS still pose significant fire risks.

3. Timber Cladding

Description:

Timber cladding is used for its natural look and feel. It is commonly used in low-rise residential buildings but also occasionally in higher-rise structures.

Risk of Combustibility:

Timber is inherently combustible. Although fire-retardant treatments can reduce the fire risk, untreated timber can easily catch fire, leading to rapid flame spread. Additionally, combustible materials used in the backing can further increase the hazard.

4. Hand-Set Brickwork or Stone

Description:

Standard hand set masonry involves using clay or concrete bricks or stone laid in mortar to form walls. It is durable, offers good thermal mass, and provides excellent weather resistance and sound insulation.

Risk of Combustibility:

Brick itself is non-combustible and provides excellent fire resistance. Hand set brick walls are generally considered lower risk, especially if there is a traditional inner leaf of brickwork or blockwork. There may however be combustible insulation and a lack of cavity barriers within the buildup.

5. Brick Slip, Stone or Terracotta Cladding

Description:

Brick slip cladding uses thin slices of brick applied to a backing board, offering the appearance of traditional brickwork with a lighter construction. Stone cladding involves applying thin pieces of natural or artificial stone to a lightweight backing structure.

Risk of Combustibility:

The brick and stone elements are non-combustible themselves. However, the backing materials and insulation used behind the cladding may be combustible. If flammable materials are used in the backing system, the fire risk is elevated, especially if cavity barriers are missing.

6. Glazing Systems

Description:

Glazing systems use glass panels in building facades, often alongside other cladding materials. They are popular in modern architecture, offering natural light and an aesthetically appealing finish.

Risk of Combustibility:

Vision glazing typically does not have to be considered, however spandrel (e.g. opaque) glazing is often used used at slab edges and party wall locations where glazing passes accoss these.

It is important to understand if combustible insulation has been used to provide insulation behind this glass, and whether fire stopping has been correctly installed to prevent the spread of fire from one compartment to another.

Conclusion

The safety of cladding systems depends on the materials used and their fire-resistance properties. Combustible materials in systems like ACM, EWI, and timber cladding pose significant fire risks.

The materials used in the External Wall should be considered within your Fire Risk Assessment, and a Fire Risk Assessment External Wall produced if there are any concerns. Typically intrusive investigations and reviews of record information will be required to assess the risk posed by the specific construction on the building to understand if it is safe and if any remedial works are required.

If you’re concerned that your building may have unsafe cladding, don’t delay in seeking professional advice. Envoy Projects are experts in remediation, offering a comprehensive service to assess, remove and replace non-compliant materials with safe, certified alternatives. With many years of experience in the construction industry, we can guide you through the process from start to finish, ensuring your building meets the latest fire safety standards.

For more information or to book a consultation, contact Envoy Projects today.

Gateway 2 approval received on Commercial Road

Gateway 2 approval received from the Building Safety Regulator!

Excellent to receive notification yesterday that one of our cladding remediation schemes in Aldgate has received Gateway 2 approval!

An incredible amount of hard work from the team pulling together a comprehensive design package based on detailed intrusive surveys completed earlier this year. All eyes are looking ahead to starting on site as soon as possible next year with our site welfare already in place ready to go!

Envoy Projects Ltd are engaged as the BSA Principal Designer and Principal Contractor for the remediation works, which include replacement of ACM cladding and combustible insulation behind terracotta and aluminium cladding.

A key milestone on our journey to make buildings safe again!

Unsafe Cladding: How Do I Know?

RTM leaseholders should know how to identify unsafe facades and ensure compliance with the latest UK fire safety regulations.

The Grenfell Tower disaster in 2017 was a turning point concerning fire safety in high-rise buildings. In response, the UK Government introduced stringent regulations to ensure that such a tragedy would never happen again.

If you’re a property owner or Right to Manage (RTM) leaseholder, it’s important to understand whether the external walls are safe and whether further action is required. This article outlines how you can spot unsafe cladding and what steps to take next.

What buildings are most at risk?

Residential buildings within the UK have essentially been split into three main categories:

Higher Risk Buildings. These are broadly defined as buildings at least 18 metres or 7 storeys in height with at least 2 residential units. These are the highest risk category of buildings and the most stringent regulations apply with a ban on combustible materials in the external wall buildup as per Building Regulation 7(2).
11-18 metres. Whilst these buildings are typically considered lower risk they have not traditionally been subject to any restrictions for the use of combustible materials in the external wall. This can result in an unacceptable risk of fire spread across the external wall.
The rest. Below 11 metres the impact of a fire spreading across the external wall is reduced and these buildings are generally considered lower risk with remediation unlikely to be required.

Within your Fire Risk Assessment the assessor will advise whether they consider a FRAEW (Fire Risk Assessment External Wall) is required. Their advice should be followed and a FRAEW (also known as a PAS9980 assessment) conducted if there are concerns about the safety of the external walls.

What cladding types are unsafe?

This is a very complicated subject as we have often found that while the outside facing material is non-combustible the buildup behind can contain significant quantities of combustible material and a lack of cavity barriers to prevent fire spread.

We have prepared a specific article which looks at the 6 main types of external walls found on buildings in the UK and the potential issues that can be found with each.

How do I confirm if I have unsafe cladding?

The external wall should be considered in the Fire Risk Assessment for your building, with the assessor advising whether a specific Fire Risk Assessment External Wall (FRAEW) is required to review the external wall in more detail.

If you have concerns or believe your building may have unsafe cladding then you should engage a suitably competent person to carry out this FRAEW assessment. The FRAEW is also commonly known as a PAS9980 assessment. PAS9980 sets out a consistent methodology to assess external walls, ensuring a holistic and proportionate approach that considers the context, materials and configuration amongst other factors.

The FRAEW or PAS9980 assessment also forms the basis of the EWS1 form which is required to demonstrate to lenders if remediation works are required to the external wall or not.

Who should I engage with to produce a FRAEW?

There are numerous consultants that produce FRAEWs. When selecting the best consultant to use there are a number of key points to consider:

Competency

To produce a FRAEW, individuals must have relevant fire safety qualifications, along with knowledge of UK Building Regulations and recent updates. They must also be familiar with various cladding systems and external wall materials, as well as fire testing standards. Practical experience in identifying fire risks related to these materials is essential.

You should ask consultants to submit a competency statement covering these areas and that is specific to the individuals who will be working on your building. Consider contacting the IFE (Institute of Fire Engineers) or other relevant bodies to validate competency.

Proposed Approach

Ask consultants to explain in detail the process they will go through to produce the FRAEW. Look for consultants that ask detailed questions about the record information available and that request thorough intrusive surveys to verify buildups.

Previous Reports

Ask for examples of previous reports produced on similar buildings. Look for detailed reports that follow a consistent methodology for each area and that conclude with clear detailed recommendations as to whether remediation measures are required or not.

It can be very tempting to go ahead with the lowest quotation or quickest process, however please consider that this is a crucial step in the process. The FRAEW is a crucial document that identifies life safety considerations with your building, and if remedial works are required becomes the backbone for everything that follows.

If remediation is required the FRAEW will set the scope of works, will be the basis of any funding applications, will be leaned on heavily by the building regulations submission and ultimately may need to be updated and signed off at the end of works by another fire engineer who may disagree with recommendations and request additional scope. A low quality FRAEW results in delays and questions at every stage in the process and could leave you with an unsafe building.

Make sure your FRAEW is robust.

What will the FRAEW process include?

Once you have engaged a consultant the process will typically commence with a detailed review of any record information that is available for the building. This may be held in paper copy in the building itself, or electronically. Detailed searches online, including contacting the original architect, contractor and structural engineer can all help in this step.

Following this intrusive surveys are often required to validate that the solutions shown on the record information are what has actually been built. Depending on the size/scale of your building these surveys will typically take 2-3 days on site and disruption to residents is usually minimal.

The report will then be produced, working through each area of the external wall and assessing it in accordance with the methodology set out in PAS9980.

Throughout the process it is crucial to check that your chosen consultant is considering all areas of the building, the full wall buildup in each location and any attachments to the façade.

Once completed the FRAEW should contain detailed recommendations confirming either that each section of the external wall does not require remediation, or setting out a detailed description of the works required to achieve a safe wall buildup.

Taking the Next Step

For more information or to book a consultation, contact Envoy Projects today.

Calling in the Remediation Professionals

Essential tips for RTM leaseholders choosing a remediation professional for cladding projects.

If you are a Right to Manage (RTM) leaseholder for your place of residence, you are responsible for ensuring that – among other things – any exterior cladding meets the latest fire safety requirements. This can easily feel overwhelming, so it’s important you place any remediation work into the hands of the professionals.

Selecting a professional cladding remediation company requires due diligence and clear communication. By gathering key information, conducting a thorough review and involving stakeholders, RTM leaseholders can ensure a smooth, efficient process that prioritises both safety and cost-effectiveness. Remember, this decision isn’t just about remediation—it’s about peace of mind for everyone involved.

Follow our guide to appointing a professional remediation team for our project.

Request Competitive Quotes

Obtain at least three quotes to compare services, pricing and timelines. This will help you make an informed decision based on value rather than just cost alone.

Conduct Interviews

An interview process can help you gauge each contractor’s communication style and expertise. Consider including a board member or representative who understands the building’s requirements to ask targeted questions. Here’s a guide to what you should be asking them:

1. Experience and Credentials

Can you provide examples of similar cladding remediation projects you’ve completed?

If your building is a higher-risk building (HRB) ask for experience in submitting and gaining approval for Gateway 2 submissions. Examples of an HRB include buildings that are at least 18 meters tall or have at least seven storeys, contain two or more residential units, or is either a hospital or care home.

What relevant certifications or accreditations does your team hold?

Look for qualifications that indicate compliance with health and safety, quality management and environmental management standards. These include FIRAS, Achilles, Constructionline Gold, ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and ISO 45001.

How do you keep your team updated with the latest building safety regulations?

This reveals the contractor’s commitment to ongoing training and compliance with evolving regulations.

2. Project Approach and Management

What is your proposed approach for our building’s remediation project?

An outline of how they develop a methodology and programme for a project. What level of delivery do they use; are they self-delivery or do they subcontract the works?

Who will be the primary contact throughout the project, and what is their experience level?

How do they manage the Resident Liaison Role? Is this supervised by employed staff or subcontracted out?

How do you handle unexpected issues or delays during the project?

Knowing their process for resolving unforeseen complications gives insight into their adaptability and contingency planning.

3. Compliance and Safety Standards

How do you ensure compliance with the Building Safety Act 2022 and other relevant regulations?

This ensures the contractor’s awareness of legal requirements specific to cladding and building safety.

What safety measures do you put in place to protect residents during the remediation work?

Understanding their safety protocols helps ensure that residents’ well-being remains a priority.

Can you walk us through your process for quality assurance and post-completion checks?

A robust system must be in place to verify the quality of work at each stage. Look for evidence that they use a cloud-based QA system such as Viewpoint Field View or Procore.

4. Timeline and Cost Management

What is your anticipated timeline for completing a project of this size?

Ask for a realistic estimate based on previous projects, to avoid prolonged disruptions.

How do you manage project costs, and what measures are in place to avoid budget overruns?

A contractor should demonstrate transparency around financial management to reduce the risk of unexpected expenses.

Are there any foreseeable factors that might affect the project timeline or cost?

This reveals their ability to foresee potential challenges and allows you to plan accordingly.

5. Insurance and Liability

Can you provide proof of insurance coverage for both public liability and professional indemnity?

Design responsibility may be in the hands of the main contractor or subcontracted to another party. It is essential that you see the proof of insurance (PI) document relative to the policy that is covering the project; to confirm there is sufficient cover for the scale of the project and to check that an IUA (International Underwriting Association) clause is included on the policy.

Have you ever encountered disputes related to cladding remediation, and how were they resolved?

This question offers insight into their problem-solving skills and approach to resolving conflicts.

6. References and Reputation

Can we speak with past clients or visit completed projects?

This can be an excellent way to verify their track record and understand the quality of their work.

What feedback have you received from previous clients about your work on cladding remediation?

Asking about client feedback gives a sense of how well they handle client relations and project challenges.

Review Contracts Thoroughly

Once you’ve selected a contractor for cladding remediation, it’s vital to review the contract meticulously to avoid potential issues down the line. A well-drafted contract should outline every aspect of the project, from scope to timelines, and set clear expectations for both parties. Here’s what RTM leaseholders should look for in the contract:

Scope of Work

The contract should provide a detailed breakdown of the work to be completed. This includes everything from the removal and replacement of cladding to fire safety checks, insulation, and any necessary repairs. Ensure it’s clear what tasks are included and what may incur additional costs if needed later. A defined scope will help prevent misunderstandings and “scope creep,” where extra work is added without corresponding approval or budget increases.

Project Timeline and Milestones

Look for a clearly defined timeline with milestones for each stage of the remediation. These milestones help you track progress and can act as checkpoints to ensure the project remains on schedule. Confirm what will happen if there are delays and whether the contractor has included contingency plans to address unforeseen issues that could impact timelines.

Cost Breakdown and Payment Terms

The contract should include a detailed cost breakdown, outlining labour, materials, and any other associated expenses. It’s also essential to understand the payment schedule – typically, contractors may request an initial deposit, with subsequent payments tied to specific project milestones. Avoid paying large upfront sums and clarify if any penalties apply for late or missed payments.

Penalties for Delays

Addressing delays is crucial for a large-scale project like cladding remediation. Check if there are penalties for missed deadlines and what constitutes a reasonable delay due to circumstances beyond the contractor’s control (such as adverse weather or material shortages). This keeps both parties accountable and ensures the project is completed within a reasonable timeframe.

Quality Assurance and Standards Compliance

The contract should specify the quality standards the contractor is expected to meet, particularly concerning fire safety and building regulations. You may want to include clauses on quality checks at various stages and a final inspection upon completion. Look for language that confirms compliance with standards such as PAS 9980 and Building Regulations, ensuring that the work will satisfy current safety regulations.

Insurance and Liability

Confirm that the contractor holds valid public liability and professional indemnity insurance, and make sure it’s outlined in the contract. This protects the RTM company and leaseholders from financial responsibility for any accidents, damages, or mistakes made by the contractor during the project. Review the coverage limits and ensure they’re adequate for the size and scope of the project.

Warranties and Maintenance

Many contractors offer warranties on the work completed, so check if the contract includes a warranty period for materials or workmanship. Warranties provide reassurance that any defects discovered after the project’s completion will be resolved at no additional cost. Additionally, clarify if there are maintenance responsibilities or inspections needed post-completion to maintain compliance with safety standards.

Change Orders and Additional Work

It’s common for issues to arise once the work begins, sometimes requiring additional tasks or changes to the original plan. The contract should outline the process for change orders, including how additional work will be approved and priced. Avoid agreeing to vague language; instead, specify that any changes must be documented, reviewed and signed off by both parties before they proceed.

Dispute Resolution

No one expects disputes, but they can occur even in well-planned projects. The contract should outline a clear process for handling disagreements or disputes. Many contracts include clauses on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods, such as mediation or arbitration, which can help resolve conflicts without resorting to litigation. Knowing how disputes will be managed can help prevent delays and extra costs if issues arise.

Termination Clauses

Ensure the contract includes terms outlining how either party can terminate the contract if necessary. For example, there may be specific terms under which you, as the client, can cancel the contract due to non-performance or significant delays. Understanding the conditions for termination and any associated penalties or requirements will help protect the RTM company if the contractor fails to meet expectations.

Who Agrees and Approves the Proposal?

In RTM companies, decision-making around major works usually involves both board members and the wider leaseholder community.

Board Approval

Initially, the board of the RTM company will review and approve the contractor’s proposal. This may involve discussions around cost, feasibility and timing to ensure all aspects align with the building’s needs and budget.

Leaseholder Consultation

Major works often require leaseholder consultation, especially if the costs will be passed onto residents through service charges. Clear communication of the project’s details, benefits and potential impact on fees helps in gaining leaseholder support.

Legal Review (if necessary)

In some cases, a legal review of the contract is advisable to safeguard the RTM company’s interests. This ensures compliance with all legal obligations and minimises future risks.

We hope this guide will help you navigate the process of selecting and appointing a professional remediation contractor. Envoy Projects Ltd, a Colorminium company, has extensive experience and expertise in cladding remediation and RTM projects and is happy to help with any further questions you may have.

Whitepaper on Cladding Remediation and Building Safety in the UK

Derived from the presentation and questions arising from the FPRA Cladding Remediation Webinar, held in association with Envoy Projects Ltd, on Wednesday 23 October 2024.

Executive Summary

This whitepaper addresses crucial questions and concerns related to cladding remediation and the role of the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) in ensuring the safety of high-rise and high-risk residential buildings in the UK.

Prompted by a recent FPRA webinar on this topic, this document outlines the current state of UK building safety regulations, clarifies the responsibilities of stakeholders, and offers recommendations to support residents and leaseholders.

Topics covered include the BSR’s Gateway processes, funding options and financial liabilities for leaseholders. The paper concludes with actionable insights aimed at enhancing transparency, regulatory efficiency, and long-term building safety.

Introduction

In response to widespread safety concerns following the Grenfell Tower fire, the UK Government has implemented several regulatory changes to address unsafe cladding in residential buildings. At the forefront of these efforts is the Building Safety Regulator (BSR), which oversees the compliance of building safety standards.

The Federation of Private Residents’ Associations (FPRA) recently held a webinar to clarify these regulations and discuss the implications for residents affected by cladding remediation.

This whitepaper expands on the discussions raised during the webinar, presenting a structured overview of the issues, solutions and regulatory guidance available to residents and leaseholders. The information presented is aimed at demystifying the complex regulatory landscape of cladding remediation, with a focus on accessibility and practicality for those unfamiliar with construction or regulatory terminology.

Challenges in Cladding Remediation and Building Safety

The need for cladding remediation has exposed significant challenges for residents, leaseholders and building owners. Issues include the complexity of navigating regulatory requirements, understanding eligibility for government funding, coping with high insurance premiums, and securing financing to cover potentially extensive remediation costs.

In addition, many stakeholders are uncertain about their financial liabilities, inspection requirements, and the procedural steps involved in remediation. This lack of clarity has created financial stress and confusion for affected residents.

The challenges outlined below encapsulate some of the most pressing issues raised during the FPRA webinar:

Complex Regulatory Standards

The introduction of the BSR and its Gateway processes has added new layers of regulatory oversight, requiring building owners to meet rigorous safety standards but often leaving residents and leaseholders unclear about their responsibilities.

Financial Uncertainty

Funding sources such as the Building Safety Fund (BSF) and Cladding Safety Scheme (CSS) offer support but with restrictions, leading to concerns about coverage limitations and the process for securing additional funds when costs exceed initial budgets.

Lack of Understanding of the Safety Remediation Process

Many residents are unsure about the precise steps required to ensure a building’s compliance with safety regulations. While the BSR’s Gateway processes aim to standardise safety across buildings, stakeholders report difficulty in understanding the exact timeline, procedural steps, and necessary documentation to complete each phase of remediation.

This lack of understanding can lead to delays, potential cost increases, and concerns about meeting regulatory requirements.

Strategy for Effective Cladding Remediation

To address these challenges Envoy has prepared a Project Journey in collaboration with MHCLG and Mott MacDonald which sets out all the steps required from the initial discovery of non-compliance to the completion and signoff of remedial works on site. The purpose of this Project Journey was to help clarify the steps and work with the market to identify areas in which the intervention was required from professional teams. This will ensure that when a project reaches site it is carried out in a way that works for all stakeholders and works to minimise the level of disruption as much as is possible to the lives of those living in the development. The simple pathway of steps required is shown in the graphic below. In working through this, Envoy was able to identify areas which early engagement could work to identify risks and mitigate delays and additional costs once the works onsite have begun.

Key Insights and Recommendations

Based on the insights shared in the FPRA webinar, we present the following recommendations for stakeholders navigating cladding remediation:

1. Engage Quality Consultants

To avoid delays, building owners should engage with competent consultants, especially in the early stages when a FRAEW (PAS9980) assessment is being prepared. This document sets the foundation for funding and building control applications.

Errors or items missing from the FRAEW can cause significant delays with funding and building control approval. Building owners should thoroughly check the FRAEW to ensure that it is detailed and that all areas of the façade have been covered.

2. Identify Appropriate Funding Sources

Building owners should determine at the earliest opportunity whether their project qualifies for the Building Safety Fund or the Cladding Safety Scheme, based on building type and cladding material.

The BSF covers all buildings over 18 metres (typically 7 stories) in London Boroughs and the CSS covers all buildings 11-18 metres (typically 4-7 stories) nationally. More recently, the scope of the CSS has been expanded to include buildings over 18 metres high outside London.

Residents should consult the www.gov.uk website for the process and how to determine eligibility.

3. Explore Additional Funding Options

If a project’s costs exceed the allocated budget, building owners can submit requests for additional funding. This can be essential to cover unforeseen expenses without shifting the financial burden to leaseholders. Early budgeting and accurate cost estimations are critical.

4. Contact Authorities with Concerns

During the remediation process, residents can reach out to their building safety manager, the local council’s building safety team or the BSR. For questions about funding or financial matters, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) can provide support.

5. Understand Remortgaging Timelines Post-Remediation

For leaseholders looking to remortgage after cladding remediation, the earliest time typically aligns with the completion of all required remediation work and the final sign-off from an official inspection. This sign-off verifies compliance with the BSR’s safety standards. However, mortgage lenders may have varying policies regarding remortgaging after remediation, so leaseholders are advised to consult their specific lender or a financial advisor to confirm eligibility and timing.

Conclusion

Cladding remediation is essential to ensure the safety of residential buildings across the UK, but it presents a range of regulatory, financial, and logistical challenges. Through this white paper, the FPRA aims to clarify these complexities and offer practical guidance for residents and leaseholders. Effective collaboration with the BSR, strategic use of government funding, and advocacy for fair insurance practices are critical to supporting safe, affordable, and efficient remediation processes.

By following the recommendations outlined above, residents, building owners, and leaseholders can navigate the remediation process with greater confidence, enhancing safety and financial stability in the long term.

References

Building Safety Regulator (BSR) – Detailed information on the BSR’s role and the Gateway processes is available on the Health and Safety Executive’s official website: https://www.hse.gov.uk/building-safety.

Building Safety Fund and Cladding Remediation Scheme – For guidance on eligibility, application processes, and criteria for both the Building Safety Fund and the Cladding Remediation Scheme, visit the UK Government’s website: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/remediation-of-non-acm-buildings.

EWS1 Ratings and Fire Safety Assessments – The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) provides information on EWS1 ratings and their implications for building safety. Further details are available here: https://www.rics.org/uk/ews1.

Leaseholder Protections – The UK Government’s Building Safety Act includes provisions for capping qualifying leaseholders’ financial liabilities. For an overview of these protections, visit the DLUHC’s dedicated page: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/building-safety-act-2022-overview.

Insurance and Cladding Remediation Costs – The Association of British Insurers (ABI) has discussed issues around insurance premium increases related to cladding remediation. For more on this, see their recent publications: https://www.abi.org.uk.

Financial Liabilities for Leaseholders – More information on the capped contributions for leaseholders in remediating unsafe cladding is available in the FPRA’s guide on cladding and building safety: https://www.fpra.org.uk/resources.

Crown Wharf – Resident Management and Safety Video

Crown Wharf, a residential building in Stratford, has recently obtained an EWS1 form after completing extensive remediation works. As the Principal Contractor, we delivered a comprehensive turnkey solution to replace the combustible cladding materials on this project.

Hear from our stakeholders about what they have to say about our involvement on the project and click here to read more about this project.

Crown Wharf

Appointed by Pellings LLP on behalf of Haus Block Management and Crown Wharf RTM, we acted as the Principal Contractor providing a full turnkey remedial solution to replace combustible cladding materials including ACM, HPL and Timber cladding, along with combustible insulation used as part of the wall build-ups and render system.

Client
Haus Block Management

Project Management
Pellings LLP

Our Service

As part of our overall solution for this project some of the key services we provided were:

Intrusive opening up surveys
Comprehensive design process including building control and fire engineer signoff
Principle contractor role including all welfare, access and installation
Thorough and fully transparent QA system covering all aspects of the works
Provision of the EWS1 form following completion
Liaison with residents including regular communications and updates
Landscaping works once site had been demobilised

Materials

EWI Render
Aluminium Cladding Panels
Fibre Cement Cladding Panels
Timber effect boarding system
Balcony decking
Glazed in spandrel panels
Brick slips

Crown Wharf Drone Video

Take a look at the aerial footage showcasing Crown Wharf from a drone’s perspective.

Insights from the BSR Conference 2024

We are thrilled to share that our team attended the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) Conference 2024, organized by the Health and Safety Executive at the NEC Birmingham today.

The conference was a great opportunity for us to engage directly with industry experts and the Building Safety Regulator, gaining valuable insights into the changes brought by the Building Safety Act. Our team benefited greatly from the discussions, which will help us continue to drive the essential culture change needed across the built environment.

Click here to find out more about our approach.

Reflecting on Grenfell: Our Commitment to Building Safety and Compliance

Today marks the 7th anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, a day that forever changed the lives of the families and communities involved. Our hearts go out to all those affected by this devastating event. This tragedy highlighted the critical importance of building compliance and safety, emphasising the urgent need to address and remediate other unsafe structures to prevent future loss of life.

Envoy was formed to help our clients make their buildings safe. Providing a turnkey package we remove layers of complexity, to simplify the process and effectively remediate these unsafe buildings.

Click here to view our approach.

Need advice or support?
Our team are here to help – contact one of our experts today> support@envoyprojects.com

Charting the Project Pathway with BSR Expertise: Insights from the April Roundtable Event

It was great to host another Roundtable event last Tuesday, and have the opportunity to network and collaborate with like-minded persons across the remediation industry. We explored ways to better support Freeholders, Managing Agents and Project Administrators in delivering safe and secure living environments for residents, with a focus around Charting the Project Pathway with BSR Expertise.

Here are some key takeaways from the event:

Clarification on Building Regulations: Emphasized that there are no alterations to the regulations themselves; rather, a procedural adjustment is in place.
Client-Side Support’s Role: Highlighted the invaluable contribution of client-side support representatives in resolving challenges related to BSF applications. Having representatives from various disciplines within the remediation process provided a comprehensive overview of existing procedures and market opportunities.
Expectations of Information Quality: Discussed the importance of meeting the expectations of both BSR and client-side support teams regarding the level and quality of information submitted for BSF and BSR applications for a seamless progression and avoiding any delays.
Key Requirements for BSR: Identified essential requirements for BSR, particularly emphasizing the significance of a comprehensive construction control plan and building control report. The inclusion of a narrative to justify decision-making processes was highlighted as crucial for reassuring the BSR.
Clarification on Emergency Works Procedures: Discussed the two primary criteria used to assess emergency works, which are:
- Emergency Nature: This criterion evaluates whether the situation constitutes an emergency, such as a burst pipe or gas leak, where immediate action is necessary to prevent harm or damage.
- Practicality of Waiting: Explored whether waiting for standard procedures is practical in the given emergency scenario. For instance, a burst pipe is typically deemed impractical to wait for due to the potential for extensive damage if not addressed promptly.
Dispelling Myths: There hasn’t been a change to the building regulations! Stressing the procedural changes for approval and the importance of thorough applications over rushing on-site.
BSA PD Role: Highlighted the importance of authority figures taking on the PD role and the recommendation for Building Control experience in applications.
BSR Review Costs: Discussed the fee structure covering BSR and team time, as well as the inability to accurately forecast review time due to insufficient benchmark data.

In conclusion, the Envoy Roundtable Event provided a valuable space for industry professionals to collaboratively address challenges, share insights, and pave the way for safer and more efficient building processes. Make sure you don’t miss out on our upcoming roundtable events by subscribing to our newsletter.

Click here to subscribe.

Building Safer Futures: Insights from the November Roundtable Event

In a collaborative effort to enhance the efficiency of building remediation processes and contribute to overall safety, we recently held a Roundtable event to discuss how we can unite industry expertise to foster a holistic approach for residential fire remediation. This open forum brought together minds from Client-Side Support, Managing Agents, Freeholders, Project Quantity Surveyors, Client Administrators, and Fire Engineering.

The event served as an exceptional platform for participants to openly discuss challenges and share experiences. Attendees had the opportunity to explore common hurdles and gain insights into successful navigation and resolution of similar obstacles. The collaborative atmosphere emphasized the shared commitment to making buildings safer and more secure. Here, we’ll dive into the key takeaways from the Envoy Roundtable event and explore the insights shared by industry experts.

1. Streamlining BSR Responses and Pre-site Assessments

Participants emphasized the potential challenges associated with obtaining timely responses from the BSR on building safety cases. There was a collective recognition of the importance of assessing buildings before they reach the site to enhance remediation efficiency.

2. Funding, Insurance, and Life Safety Perspectives

The discussion highlighted the multifaceted considerations in building safety, with an emphasis on funding not being the sole concern. Insights were shared on the crucial role of insurance and the necessity of adopting a life safety perspective, as often perceived by insurers from an asset-oriented standpoint.

3. Defining Ideal Safety Cases and Collaborative Standards

David Baker discussed the challenge of defining an ideal safety case and the collaborative efforts to establish standards. As well as acknowledging the uncertainty in the industry.

The discussion extended to the realization that the safety case is not the end of the journey, with concerns raised about varying interpretations of PAS reports. This highlighted the need for clarity and consistency in understanding and implementing safety measures.

A participant expressed concerns about lending issues for leaseholders, underscoring the importance of safety cases in the context of building lending. This perspective emphasized the broader financial implications tied to safety considerations.

4. Challenges for Managing Agents and Addressing Risk Aversion

Abigail Blumzon shared insights on the challenges posed to managing agents by legislation changes and the establishment of a BSR. She mentioned that they have set up a working group with varied in-house experts from across their multi-disciplinary teams, working to review legislation, guidance and information, and to act as an advisory group to help mitigate risks and keep projects running smoothly.

5.Thorough Building Investigations and Design Trade-offs

A prominent concern echoed by many at the roundtable was the the need for thorough building investigations to avoid issues. Discussed the potential safety trade-offs between introducing design at the second stage and traditional approaches. Is the introduction of the BSR process moving the market to a 2 stage PCSA tender process?

6.Improving Communication with DLUHC

The need for enhanced communication between DLUHC and the industry was explored, with suggestions including industry calls, regular updates, and the establishment of a market expert panel. This emphasized the importance of cohesive and transparent communication channels within the industry.

Attendee Takeaways:

Martyn Francis acknowledged the uniqueness of each project and the need for bespoke solutions, particularly regarding the wide-reaching implications of the BSR.

Danny Carty encouraged perseverance in the ever-changing building industry environment.

David Baker recognized obstacles in the industry-wide remediation of High-Rise Buildings (HRBs) and the need to resolve funding process issues.

Chris Peters emphasized the strong skill set within the sector and acknowledged the industry-wide obstacles.

Darren Wilkes-Brough highlighted the collaborative nature of the sector and proposed a review of the delivery method, suggesting a Risk/Contingency allocation for all projects.

In conclusion, the Envoy Roundtable Event provided a valuable space for industry professionals to collaboratively address challenges, share insights, and pave the way for safer and more efficient building processes. The key takeaways underscored the need for ongoing collaboration, adaptability, and proactive solutions in the ever-evolving landscape of building safety.

Make sure you don’t miss out on our upcoming roundtable events by subscribing to our newsletter.

Click here to subscribe.

The Final Stages of Crown Wharf

As the works on-site are drawing to a close, we find ourselves in the exciting final stages of this project. The journey has been long and challenging, but the progress has been truly remarkable.

With the brickwork replacement making excellent progress and slated for completion by the end of this month, we are on track to have all the scaffolding removed before the end of the year.

We are delighted to share some heart-warming feedback from the residents at Crown Wharf, who have stood by our side throughout this journey. One resident expressed their gratitude by saying, “Just wanted to say a thank you to everyone on the team for the work over the last 18 months and how lovely it is to have the sky back again! But seriously, an absolutely fantastic job. The place looks brand new.” Such feedback is a testament to the dedication and hard work of our team.

Click here to hear more about what our residents have to say.

We would like to take a moment to express our sincere gratitude to all the residents at Crown Wharf for their incredible patience and understanding during the disruptions that occurred over the past three years. Your support and cooperation have been invaluable and have played a significant role in enabling us to complete the necessary remedial works. It has been an absolute pleasure to work on this site, and we are honoured to have been a part of this transformative project.

Stay tuned for the upcoming developments and the grand unveiling of the revitalized Crown Wharf. We can’t wait to share the final results with you all!

Click here to find out more about this project.

Interested to hear insights, the latest news, exciting events, and much more? Click here to subscribe to our newsletter.

Navigating Construction Challenges: Insights from the Envoy Roundtable Event

In a dynamic and ever-changing construction industry, staying ahead of the curve is essential for success. Recently, at the Envoy Roundtable Event, industry leaders came together to discuss the topic and question around the pressing concerns and challenges they face daily and how we can unite industry expertise to foster a holistic approach for residential fire remediation. This event creates a platform for collaboration, learning, and networking to better support freeholders and developers in delivering safe and secure living environments for residents. From labour shortages to compliance issues and the need for standardized information, the event shed light on the complex landscape of construction and remediation. Here, we’ll dive into the key takeaways from the Envoy Roundtable event and explore the insights shared by industry experts.

Labour Shortage and Its Impact

A prominent concern echoed by many at the roundtable was the shortage of skilled labour in the construction sector. Following Brexit and COVID, a significant number of workers returned to Europe and the Baltic States, adding additional pressure, as a good number of the skilled workforce originally came from these regions. The scarcity of skilled workers poses challenges in meeting project deadlines and budgets.

David Baker highlighted the struggles of obtaining good contractors within a reasonable timeframe. He emphasized the sluggish bureaucratic processes involved in government applications, taking up to two years to secure funding approval. The backlog of processing and registering buildings further exacerbates the issue.

The Challenge of Compliance and Environmental Credibility

Contractors and developers face a growing need for compliance with environmental regulations. This includes ensuring the competence and credibility of contractors and maintaining environmental standards.

One of the participants underscored importance of selecting contractors based on capacity, compliance, competence, and lead times rather than solely focusing on cost. He also highlighted the trend of individuals breaking away from subcontractors to establish their own companies, further straining the labour pool.

Procurement Routes

The conversation around preferred contractors vs. competitive tenders was raised by attendees. It’s clear that the industry is inclined to move towards a new approach.

Standardized Information and Building Knowledge

One common frustration among industry experts was the lack of readily available building information. Property managers often lacked critical knowledge about the buildings they oversee. The absence of ‘as-built’ information can lead to complications and delays when issues arise.

To address this issue, participants stressed the importance of the new standardised “golden thread” of information for each building. This would provide essential data for contractors and property managers, reducing uncertainty and risks associated with remediation and construction projects.

Fire Engineers and Façade Understanding

The role of fire engineers in the remediation process was another significant topic of discussion. It is a challenge for fire engineers to work through the process of reporting on a building with very little ‘as-built’ information, and the reports can only be based on select areas of opening up. This limits the ability of fire engineers to deliver a detailed guaranteed report of the complete wall build-up, making the reports somewhat subjective.

Material Innovation and Skill Development

The need for investing in training and facilities was emphasised to address the skill shortage in the industry. Pay increases may be necessary to attract and retain skilled workers, especially when safety is at stake.

The Debate Over PAS and Peer Review

One of the participants expressed reservations about the current PAS (Publicly Available Specification) route and advocated for a more holistic approach to external wall assessments. He stressed the importance of building upon existing frameworks to ensure stability in the industry.

In conclusion, the Envoy Roundtable event brought to light several critical challenges facing the construction and remediation industry. From labour shortages to compliance issues, standardized information, and the role of fire engineers, the discussions underscored the need for collaboration, innovation, and a commitment to training and safety. By addressing these challenges collectively, the industry can navigate its way towards more efficient and sustainable construction practices.

“It was a very beneficial morning sharing experiences, solutions, and ideas on how to navigate through an ever-changing regime of Building Safety. I look forward to attending future events. Envoy, thank you for the invite and for being great hosts.” – Robert McMillan

Due to the high demand and requests from the industry to hold another one as soon as possible, we are planning another Roundtable event in November. Make sure you don’t miss out on our upcoming roundtable event in November by subscribing to our newsletter.

Click here to subscribe.

Hear What They Have to Say…

Resident liaison is so critical in #cladding #remediation projects. The residents safety is paramount, but also to treat them with compassion for what they have and are experiencing everyday should be front and centre of what we do.

We ensure occupant safety is our topmost priority, and are fully committed to achieving consistent compliance.

Click here to hear what our residents have to say.

Need advice or support?
Our team are here to help – contact one of our experts today> support@envoyprojects.com

Crown Wharf Resident Gift Bags

Part of our adherence to social responsibility is to ensure that we support the local community by ensuring they are well informed throughout the process of making their building safe.

Maintaining consistent contact with the residents at Crown Wharf is something Envoy has excelled in and as a thank you for their ongoing patience, we presented each resident with a gift bag.

Since we commenced on site at the beginning of 2022, we have maintained consistent contact with the residents at Crown Wharf, ensuring that they are informed every step of the way as their building is made safe.

Click here to see our LinkedIn Page.

Are You Compliant? Understanding the Impact of the Building Safety Act

The Building Safety Act 2022 represents a significant milestone in enhancing building safety standards and practices. As the construction industry continues to evolve, compliance with this legislation is paramount to create a safer and more accountable built environment.

The Grenfell Tower tragedy in 2017 was a wake-up call for the construction industry and policymakers worldwide. In response to the devastating fire, governments and regulatory bodies took action to prevent such incidents in the future. The enactment of the Building Safety Act stands as a significant milestone in ensuring building safety and compliance.

The Act places a greater responsibility on construction companies and the owners of buildings for guaranteeing that the correct safety measures are in place throughout the lifecycle of a building. This means that the companies and owners must ensure that each building in their portfolio is compliant with the law that the Regulator has established, and that the buildings are managed and dealt with according to their degree of risk. Non-compliance by those responsible can have significant consequences, including reputational damage and legal action.

Compliance with the Building Safety Act:

As part of the Building Safety Act, it is a legal requirement that all high-rise buildings 18m or higher with two or more residential units to be registered with the Building Safety Regulator by 1 October 2023. The registration process opened on the 1^st of April 2023. The Principal Accountable Person for each building is required to:

Complete the registration process of their building with the BSR (Building Safety Regulator)
Perform a building safety risk assessment
Introduce measures to manage the risks
Prepare a Safety Case Report for submission to the BSR

What is a Building Safety Case and Safety Case Report?

The Safety Case is all the information used to manage the risk of fire spread and structural safety of the building. The information is used as evidence to demonstrate and justify how these hazards and their consequences are being prevented in the building.

The Safety Case Report is a document that shows how Building Safety risks have been assessed and all the reasonable steps that are being taken to prevent risk. It clearly identifies any major fire and structural hazards in the building and shows how the Accountable person is managing the risks associated with the building. The Building Safety Regulator will use the report to assess and verify the systems for managing, controlling, and mitigating major fire and structural risks in the specific building. It is the primary way the BSR will hold the Accountable Person to account.

What must the Report include?

A Description of the Building
Information about the Residents in the Building Relevant to Safety Risks
Emergency Plans and Preparedness Procedures
An Assessment of the Risks Residents Face
Fire Prevention Measures
Structural Safety
Services And Utilities Information
Inspection And Maintenance

The Report must be able to give confidence that the building’s fire and structural risks are identified and managed adequately. Therefore, the PAP must ensure it is continually reviewed and updated to reflect any changes. The Report is assisted by the Golden Thread of information which delivers all information and evidence around the assessment and management of Building Safety risks.

Non-compliance with the Report:

Failure to submit a completed Safety Case Report is a criminal offence under the Act, and high-rise residential safety managers must ensure that the Report meets all the requirements. Non-compliance can lead to serious consequences to those responsible. Some of these include:

Legal and financial consequences: can lead to fines, imprisonment, and liability claims in the event of a fire or other safety incident.
Increased Building Safety Risks: If the regulations are not upheld, there would be increased safety risks for building occupants, including risks from structural failure and fire hazards.
Reputational damage: Building owners and construction companies can suffer reputational damage for not complying and therefore lose opportunities and trust from key stakeholders.
Delays in project construction: Safety issues will need to be identified and addressed if there is failure to comply with safety regulations, which would cause delay in any projects in the construction stage.
Environmental harm: Can also result in damage to the environment, pollution and waste and harm to wildlife and natural resources.
Difficulty selling and leasing: Non-compliance with the regulations would make it difficult to sell or lease the building, especially for residents looking to move or re-mortgage.
Insurance issues: Insurance coverage for the building would result in increased costs and liability as it would be harder to insure the building.

What is the Golden Thread and why is it so important?

‘The Golden Thread is both the information that allows you to understand a building and the steps needed to keep both the building and the steps needed to keep both the building and the people safe, now and in the future.’ BRAC’s summary definition.

The government requires that Duty holders and Principal Accountable Persons create and maintain a golden thread, throughout a building’s life cycle. The golden thread includes:

The information about a building that allows someone to understand a building and manage it safely.
The information management to ensure the information is accurate, easily understandable, can be accessed by those who need it and is up to date.

It will ensure that building owners have well-documented and accurate evidence of their risk assessments and safety arrangements as well as supported documentation. It will make it easier for them to manage relevant safety information, providing assurance to both the BSR and residents that measures are in place to manage risk and safety.

The Golden Thread will apply to all the buildings within the scope of the Building Safety Regime. It will use digital tools and systems to enable key information on the buildings to be stored and used effectively to ensure safer buildings. It will be used to support duty holders and the Principle Accountable Persons throughout the life cycle of a building by recording all information.

The Golden Thread brings all information together in a single place meaning there is always one source of truth. It ensures that information on the building is easily accessible to the right people at the right time. It also sets out a new higher standard of information-keeping which will support the BSR in assuring buildings are managed safely.

Further information can be found on this link.

Compliance with the Building Safety Act is imperative for creating a safe built environment. Safety Case Reports play a pivotal role in assessing and mitigating risks associated with high-rise residential buildings. By adherence to the Act and preparation of complete and thorough Safety Case Reports whilst upholding The Golden Thread, duty holders demonstrate their commitment to building safety, and participate in the ongoing campaign for Building Safety in the built environment.

Building Safety Act Regulations: Ensuring a Safer Future

Compliance with the Building Safety Act:

Compliance with Regulations: PAPs are required to comply with all relevant building codes, regulations, and standards applicable to the design, construction, maintenance, and inspection of buildings.
Professional Competence: PAPs must possess appropriate professional skills, qualifications, and experience relevant to their role in the building industry. They are expected to keep their knowledge up-to-date with the latest developments in building safety practices and technologies.
Design and Construction Oversight: PAPs are often involved in the design and construction phases of buildings. They have an obligation to ensure that the design plans and construction work meet all applicable safety requirements and standards.
Risk Assessment: PAPs may be responsible for conducting risk assessments to identify potential hazards and risks associated with building projects. They must take appropriate measures to mitigate these risks to ensure the safety of occupants and the public.
Quality Assurance: PAPs are expected to implement quality assurance measures throughout the construction process to ensure that materials, methods, and workmanship meet the required standards.
Inspection and Certification: PAPs may be involved in inspecting buildings at various stages of construction or renovation to verify compliance with building codes and approved plans. They may also issue certifications or permits indicating compliance with safety regulations.
Continuing Professional Development: PAPs are encouraged to engage in continuous learning and professional development activities to enhance their knowledge and skills in building safety practices.
Ethical Conduct: PAPs are expected to adhere to high ethical standards in their professional practice, including honesty, integrity, and accountability.
Reporting and Documentation: PAPs may be required to maintain accurate records, reports, and documentation related to their involvement in building projects, including design plans, inspection reports, and certifications.
Collaboration and Communication: PAPs often work collaboratively with other professionals involved in building projects, such as architects, engineers, contractors, and regulatory authorities. Effective communication and collaboration are essential to ensure that safety requirements are met throughout the project lifecycle.

Challenges faced by PAP’s:

Ultimate accountability for building safety typically rests with the PAP and can never be fully delegated away. Why is this a problem?

PAP’s are generally building owners and managers, not building constructors. Therefore it is unusual to expect them to be fully conversant with a Building Regulation such as the BSA.

As of my last update in January 2022, the Building Safety Act (BSA) hadn’t been fully implemented in many jurisdictions. However, based on the intentions and discussions surrounding the act, here are some potential problems Principle Accountable Persons (PAPs) might face and how they could try to delegate their responsibilities:

Complexity of Compliance: The BSA introduces a range of new requirements and obligations for PAPs, which are complex to navigate and comply with.

Delegation: PAPs are likely to delegate specific tasks related to compliance with the BSA to qualified personnel within their organization or external consultants. Getting these appointments correct in terms of scope and legal clarity is critical.

Liability Concerns: In the event of a building safety incident and the PAP not being able to suitably demonstrate good practice and due diligence the they are personally liable for prosecution.

Resource Constraints: Implementing the requirements of the BSA may require substantial financial resources, as well as time and personnel commitments – it is likely viewed as an annoying distraction. PAPs, particularly those in smaller organizations or with limited budgets, may struggle to allocate sufficient resources, attention and focus to meet these demands.

Changing Regulatory Landscape: The regulatory environment surrounding building safety is constantly evolving, with new requirements, guidelines, and best practices emerging over time. PAPs must stay informed and adapt.

Technological Challenges: The BSA emphasizes ‘Golden Thread’, the use of technology in ensuring digital record-keeping and information-sharing systems so as to improve building safety management.

What is the Golden Thread and why is it so important?

The government requires that Duty holders and Principal Accountable Persons create and maintain a golden thread, throughout a building’s life cycle. The golden thread includes:

The information about a building that allows someone to understand a building and manage it safely.
The information management to ensure the information is accurate, easily understandable, can be accessed by those who need it and is up to date.

Further information can be found on this link.

End of Sprint Celebration

Last Friday was an exciting day for Colorminium and Envoy, as it marked the first full team get together for 2023. It was great to have the opportunity to meet everyone and take some time out of our normal day to enjoy a BBQ cooked and served by some of the keen chefs in our team!

It also gave us time to connect with some of our new team members and collaborate with each other to share ideas, discuss smarter ways to get more done, and plan ahead for the next Sprint.

We spent some time during the afternoon reviewing our Core Values, keeping them front of mind and ensuring we stay aligned to them in everything we do. We also reviewed the first third of 2023, sharing some key highlights and discussing our plans and goals for the future.

Crown Wharf Timber Sustainability

As part of our commitment to a sustainable future for developments in London, we love to see redundant materials such as the Balau timber cladding and Ekki timber decking from our Crown Wharf site being repurposed for other projects.

We are thrilled to be collaborating with Ashwells – Reclaimed Timber by supplying them with timber that we had removed during our turnkey remediation work on Crown Wharf.

Crown Wharf Project Update

We are thrilled to update you on the latest developments at Crown Wharf, as we have recently begun installing brick slips using a cutting-edge corium cladding system.

We are also excited to be working alongside Pellings to ensure that the building is safe and secure for the residents.

If you’re interested in learning more about this exciting project, please click here.

Recognizing our Crown Wharf teams’ success and hard work with Pizza Day

Envoy Projects Ltd held a Pizza Day at Crown Wharf yesterday to recognise the teams’ success in achieving their February Goals.

This is an excellent example of how small initiatives can make a significant impact on team morale. Generating positive work culture, promoting teamwork, and showing appreciation for the teams’ hard work.

Building on 46 Years of Successful Façade Delivery

Envoy Projects Ltd builds on 46 years of successful façade delivery by its parent company, Colorminium London Ltd.

We work with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and their project management team at Faithful + Gould along with some of the markets largest Developers, Housing Associations, Building Managers and Fire Engineers.

Listen to Charles Horne from British Land talk about the 100 Liverpool Street Project and how Colorminium helped turn his vision into a reality, by transforming Broadgate from a 5 day a week operation to a world-class 7 day a week mixed use destination.

Colorminium London Ltd had the privilege of working alongside Hopkins Architects to develop this complex façade for the stunning elliptical atrium and partnering with Sir Robert McAlpine to deliver the installation of the atrium as the crown of the building. Our involvement then extended to design and manufacture the surgical and crisp looking soffits that sweep through the arcade from Liverpool Street station to Broadgate Circle.

This truly impressive project was London’s first net-zero delivery and quick to be recognised by multiple awards and a BREEAM Outstanding rating. It provides the benchmark for London offices, demonstrating clear strategic thinking in the approach to reuse of the existing building structure.

Bring the power of Colorminium experience and expertise to your cladding remediation project!

Thank you, Residents at Crown Wharf!

As a thank you for their ongoing patience, we presented each resident with a hamper at the end of the year, hand delivered by our on-site team.

Envoy Projects Ltd is a specialist division of Colorminium London Ltd, on a mission to help our clients make their buildings safe! Read more about our turnkey remedial works here.

The Minories Hotel, Aldgate

This recently completed project sees the first Canopy by Hilton open it’s doors to guests in Aldgate London.

Commissioned by the client, 4C Hotel Group in January 2017 to work on the largest hotel project in their portfolio, Colorminium worked on a façade strategy starting with optimisation through to developing the detailed design of the façade with Acme architects from RIBA stage 2.

This early engagement enabled us to realise the vision of celebrating the existing façade with a bespoke feature fin system that clad the existing pre-cast frame, to give it the stunning finish we see today.

This video captures our journey with the Client and Architect on another stunning landmark scheme – working together to build a sustainable future for London.