Articles by CBAssociates

Submitted, IFRA, July 2001

Is your crystal ball really a rear view mirror?

If the crystal balls had been clearly focused on the future over the years, most of the printing facilities built on new sites would never have been needed. Instead, the original plants would have been well equipped to easily accommodate growth and changing technology.

But, of course, this is not the case. It seems that for the past 20 or 30 years most publishers were confident that their buildings would be adequate forever, with the exception of maybe adding a press. They must have decided that all the innovations to production equipment that would ever take place had already taken place. Linotypes would never be replaced; stereo plate systems would continue as the plate system; and, of course, press technology would not change.

Because the industry had not evolved in any major way for decades, we can excuse some of this thinking. However, many facilities built as few as 10 years ago face serious constraints today. How can this be?

Basing the future on the past

It seems that key decision makers made choices based on factors they saw very clearly — preprint volumes remaining level, color demand stagnating, and distribution systems remaining the same. Unfortunately their crystal balls were focused on the present, or even the past — not the future.

Because of this, most of the printing plant expansions in the United States are comprised of new buildings to house mailroom functions that can't be accommodated on existing sites. For the lack of a few thousand square feet of expansion space, a new building is required and a new press is purchased.

Of course, this can be avoided if there's room to grow. But it's often difficult to convince a publisher or the finance people to buy more land than is needed for the current project — to invest in land for the sole purpose of future expansion.

Many people reason that the excess land does not produce a return and it ties up capital. But those looking to the future know that the return is 10 or more years away when the newspaper is able to expand on the site and avoid a $30 million expenditure.

Developing a master plan

But having enough land is not enough. Those with an eye toward the future also know that if the building is not situated on the site in a manner that allows expansion, the extra land is a wasted investment.

While with Gannett, I was responsible for facilities, and we experienced an example of bad site planning. One of our newspapers wanted to add on to its building. Adequate land for expansion was adjacent to the building. However, what was to be a very simple and inexpensive expansion was stopped.

Stopped because the architect had placed all the incoming utilities, including the power transformer, and the sewers right in the path of expansion. During the initial design, he was not thinking about future expansion, just that this was the cheapest location for the services. However, it eliminated all expansion possibilities.

This is not an isolated case. Frequently buildings are placed in the middle of properties rather than in locations that provide the most or best expansion space simply because this looks best to the architect and owner.

In order for expansion space to be useful, it must be included in the overall project design. It is not enough merely to set it aside for expansion.

An example of this is a newspaper company that built a remote production facility with plans to move the office functions later. To save money, the company decided not to develop a master plan to outline how the office would interface with the production building. Instead they would wait to determine the location and interface when they were ready to move. They reasoned that the large site would provide adequate options.

However, for lack of a master plan, they ended up not being able to build the office facility in the best location.

The benchmark method for ensuring that buildings can expand in a logical manner is used by companies that design the areas for expansion and the corresponding elements as if they would be built with the initial building.

For example, when Dayton Daily News built its new facility, they determined how each major system, such as press, automated paper handling and packaging, would grow. This long-term focus allowed them to make provisions in the current structure they would not have made otherwise.

This method takes a little more time and expense, but it ensures that the expansion space will properly integrate with the current facility. It also ensures that the facility's location on the site will provide maximum flexibility.

Most of us cannot look into a crystal ball to see what the future will bring. And it is hard not to make decisions believing that the future will be only slightly different from what's going on now. However, the clever designers will create facilities and select sites that have the flexibility and room to grow or change, no matter what the lies ahead.

[HOME]