Respecting your peers
Paul Cairns, Associate at Banyards, explores the value of peer reviews in building services design.
In today’s complex and fast-paced construction landscape, the margin for error in building services design is razor-thin. Whether in a luxury hotel, a busy hospital or a new school campus, even minor design oversights can lead to costly delays, compromised performance or long-term inefficiencies. This is where the power of peer review becomes clear.
As an experienced MEP consultancy, we see peer reviews not just as a safeguard, but as a critical quality assurance tool, one that supports better outcomes across all sectors of the built environment.
A key distinction among MEP design consultancies is whether they integrate commissioning expertise directly into their review and assessment processes. While many firms provide peer reviews as a separate service, some combine independent design evaluation with specialist commissioning knowledge. This approach supports early identification and resolution of design issues, helps maintain a holistic view of system performance and allows for thorough consideration of commissionability.
Working with a single, impartial consultancy throughout a project can help ensure that building systems not only satisfy design intent but also operate reliably and efficiently once in use. A comprehensive, integrated process can reduce risk, minimise rework and provide greater confidence in long-term asset performance.
What Is a peer review?
A peer review is an independent technical assessment of a building services design, carried out by a qualified third-party consultancy. It serves to verify that the proposed mechanical, electrical and public health systems are fit for purpose, compliant with relevant regulations, coordinated with the wider design and aligned with the project’s environmental and operational goals.
Peer reviews are not about criticising another designer’s work, they’re about enhancing it. A fresh set of expert eyes often identifies gaps, assumptions or risks that may not have been spotted internally.
Why peer reviews matter across sectors
Regardless of the building type, peer reviews play a vital role in safeguarding quality, reducing risk, and ensuring that MEP designs are both technically sound and fit for purpose. While the core value remains consistent, the specific benefits vary across different sectors.
In hotels, guest experience relies on the seamless operation of building systems.
A well timed peer review ensures that MEP designs are properly coordinated, resilient and capable of delivering consistent comfort without excess energy consumption. This proactive step helps avoid design flaws that could impact occupancy, guest satisfaction, or operating costs.
In the education sector, where projects often involve legacy infrastructure, phased construction and budgetary pressures, peer reviews provide reassurance that systems are practical, compliant and buildable. They minimise the risk of disruptive, costly redesigns and ensure systems perform as expected from day one.
For residential developments, especially multi-unit or high-spec schemes, end-user satisfaction is closely tied to the reliability and efficiency of building services. Peer reviews help validate energy strategies, confirm compliance with regulations such as Approved Document F, Approved Document L & Approved Document O and ensure that communal systems are designed with longevity and performance in mind.
In healthcare environments, the stakes are even higher. Systems must support critical operations, clinical hygiene and robust compliance. Peer reviews are an essential tool for identifying design risks early, confirming compliance with HTMs & HBNs, validating technical robustness and ensuring systems perform under all operating scenarios, without compromising patient safety or regulatory obligations.
Finally, in the commercial sector, where tenant expectations are increasingly driven by ESG, performance and wellbeing, peer reviews help developers and landlords confirm that systems go beyond minimum standards. They support investment-grade design decisions, reduce lifecycle costs and protect long-term asset value by reducing the risk of future retrofit requirements.
Independent insight, informed decisions
A professionally conducted peer review can provide the confidence to proceed with procurement or construction, or highlight where design amendments are needed. It supports better collaboration, reduces risk, and ultimately leads to better buildings.
Peer reviews are often carried out at key project stages, from concept development through detailed design. When conducted impartially, they help project teams make informed decisions - whether by challenging assumptions, validating complex design elements or confirming that critical details have not been overlooked.
Case Study: Luxury Private Villa Development, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
The challenge
A newly completed luxury private villa development experienced significant mechanical and electrical performance issues shortly after completion. Despite the project’s high profile, concerns emerged around HVAC performance and the lack of temperature control across the estate. Given the scale and complexity of the development, the client required independent technical assurance to identify root causes, validate system performance and de-risk long-term operation.
Our role
Banyards was appointed as Independent MEP Technical Advisor, firstly providing a structured design peer review and then a physical system validation service to identify the source of the issues. Banyards was then appointed to oversee the remedial MEP design process, monitor the site installation and also undertake the management of the contractors commissioning works to ensure the system amendments were operating as designed.
What we reviewed
The review covered all primary MEP systems across the estate, including:
• Domestic water systems
• Central cooling and chilled water systems
• Ventilation systems
• Temperature control, zoning and reheat provision
• Electrical distribution and system resilience
• Control philosophy, BMS integration and system interoperability
Design documentation, commissioning records and operational data were interrogated to identify discrepancies between design intent, installation and actual performance.
Our approach
A structured, root-and-branch peer review methodology was adopted, delivered through a phased programme of work:
• Phase 1 – Desktop Design Review
• Phase 2 – Site Validation Surveys
• Phase 3 – Consolidated Technical Review & Recommendations
• Phase 4 – Design Oversight & Supervision
• Phase 5 – Re-commissioning Witnessing & Certification
All site activities were delivered within a constrained 40-day window aligned to the client’s occupation programme.
Key issues
• Temperature control failures: The original designer had designed a complex Variable Air Volume (VAV) system and had overestimated the thermal response of the building. Without a system of terminal reheat to the VAV boxes, there was no ability to provide adequate zonal temperature control.
• Undocumented design changes: Multiple unrecorded alterations undermining system transparency and control.
• Ventilation imbalance: Negative pressurisation in parts of the estate, creating air quality and comfort concerns.
• Lack of integrated control: Absence of coherent estate-wide system management and coordination.
Deliverables
• Independent design peer review commentary
• Site validation findings and photographic evidence
• Consolidated technical recommendations report
• Recommissioning witness records and certification
• Ongoing technical advisory support to handover
Value delivered
Banyards’ independent peer review and technical oversight enabled the project team to:
• Identify and resolve root-cause design and commissioning issues
• Restore occupant comfort and system stability
• Improve system transparency, control and long-term operability
• Achieve compliant handover with confidence in performance and reliability
The project successfully achieved handover in late 2024, with all MEP systems operating in accordance with agreed performance criteria.
