“The program was actually changing the whole time we were working on our feasibility study, our concept study, design, and even during the construction,” says Robert P. Stundtner, director of capital projects for Cornell. “For example, programs were constantly being moved in or out of the project. In every case, the function of the space they were moving into, or we were planning for, changed to more expensive space.”

The building is designed to accommodate interdisciplinary research with leading-edge laboratories and teaching space. The LSTB is the focal point of the New Life Sciences Initiative, the University’s $600-million investment in cross-disciplinary research and its largest-ever investment in science. The new building will be home to the Cornell Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology, which serves as the anchor of the facility. Other departments housed in the LSTB will include the Department of Biomedical Engineering, Computational Biology, Biophysics, the Division of Nutritional Sciences, Plant Functional Genomics, and the Innovation Development and Economic Application (IDEA) Center. The IDEA Center will support the startup and development of life sciences-related companies and the commercialization of Cornell’s technologies. State-of-the-art distance learning capabilities are available in the LSTB to facilitate collaboration between Cornell’s Ithaca campus and other locations.

“The LSTB will integrate life sciences with physical, engineering, and computational sciences; provide campus-wide access to state-of-the-art technologies; enhance connectivity for research, education, and outreach activities; and serve as an intellectual and operational magnet for faculty, students, and visitors,” says Stundtner.

The 250,000-sf facility, which includes a basement, four floors, and a mechanical penthouse on the fifth floor, is slated for completion in early 2008. Full occupancy of between 450 and 500 scientists and staff members is expected to be finalized by mid-March 2008.

Construction of the $163-million LSTB began in June 2005 as the largest single building project ever undertaken by Cornell. While traditional construction project budgets typically include contingency funds to compensate for unforeseen circumstances, errors, and omissions, this particular building was designed and constructed in a more unconventional “change-as-you-go” manner. Planning for faculty members who had not been hired and programs that had not been developed required the use of innovative design, budget, and construction strategies.

Using Unorthodox Strategies

Strategies During Design

The design strategy began by engaging all primary stakeholders, including the architect, engineers, the construction manager, the commissioning authority, and the user representatives. In addition, a flexible layout called for interdisciplinary laboratory space to be located on all four floors. The mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems are also flexible enough to accommodate varying lab configurations in the future.

Approximately 35 percent of the planned laboratory space, including two floors on the southern end of the building and a portion of the imaging, low-vibration space in the basement was set aside as shell space.

“That meant we had to plan all of the systems to support bringing these shelled spaces online perhaps even after the building is already occupied,” says Stundtner. “You also have to be able to commission the building with a portion of it missing and without disrupting the occupants working in the other spaces.”

Strategies During Budgeting

The financial strategies began with the University sharing its cost knowledge base with the construction manager in order to work together to define a range of changes that could potentially take place in the building. Probable costs for scope changes were then forecasted. The strategy called for the University to bring additional funds to the table in the form of faculty startup packages.

“The project team had an understanding that startup funding for new faculty hires would fund program changes beyond those anticipated within the budget model,” notes Stundtner. “However, the administration subsequently directed the team to expend project contingency on these changes, but they would back us up by the amount of those changes if we over-expended the budget.”

Strategies During Construction

First, the University selected a construction manager who was experienced in developing facilities like the LSTB where an extensive amount of fit-out was necessary during construction and after the building was completed. Next, a menu of laboratory features and options was created to give potential users a selection of amenities for their research space.

The University also forecasted and tracked its contingency exposures to include a wide gamut of potential unforeseen conditions that could occur, as well as omissions and errors that would have to be figured into the budget down the road.

“We also tried to identify and engage our newly hired faculty as soon as possible. As faculty were hired, the faculty building committee’s program manager met with them to determine their needs,” says Stundtner. “This information was then passed along to the design team. The program manager tended to work in a serial fashion, dragging out the process. There were also many iterative rounds of clarifying questions that all had to be funneled through the program manager. Our lesson learned here is to get the program manager out from the middle of the conversation to make the communications more efficient.”

Reasonable risks were taken as part of the construction strategies. For instance, mass excavation was started prior to the completion of the construction documents. Construction of the generic lab spaces also progressed even though some finish work had to be redone later to provide customized space for new faculty.

Design and Change Orders

The LSTB is designed around a very open, flexible plan that features laboratories on all four of the above-ground floors. The laboratories, which include planning modules that are 10.5 feet by 57 feet, are located on the eastern side of the building and include adjacent lab support areas, user equipment space, and a linear equipment room. Elevators at the ends of the linear equipment room permit the movement of equipment, chemicals, and animals throughout the building without using the public circulation systems. Offices are located outside the laboratories on the western side of the building.

The two-story learning center wing branches out from the building’s western side and will serve as a centerpiece for formal and informal interaction among faculty, students, staff, and visitors. The multipurpose space includes lecture halls, conference rooms, an interactive teleconference room, and a full-service café. An atrium provides additional space for interaction and collaboration.

Air handlers in the penthouse draw air from the east side of the building and duct it down through the shafts. The basement houses the vivarium, low-vibration laboratories, plant genomic space, and mechanical space.

The project budget included a contingency fund of $11 million, but program changes made throughout the design and construction process topped this figure. For example, the University had allotted $10 million for the development of a vivarium which would be attached to the existing Division of Nutritional Sciences building. However, design plans concluded it would cost $13 million to replace the inadequate vivarium in the DNS building. Therefore, the most cost-effective alternative was to include the vivarium in the LSTB, a decision that added $6.7 million to the LSTB project cost.

An additional $350,000 in program changes occurred as the result of users requesting extra features, such as light rooms, a tissue culture lab, and a chemistry lab, for the plant genomics area.

Including low-vibration laboratories in the LSTB cost more than $1.1 million with $280,000 of that amount being used for program changes to accommodate users with a tissue culture lab, chemistry lab, and design specifications to minimize vibration.

Changes requested by the director of the Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology resulted in a financial impact to the budget of more than $4 million. Specifically, the director wanted offices to be located within the laboratories, the laboratories and faculty offices to be larger, another cold room to be added, and more social spaces to be included in the building.

Users in the Department of Biomedical Engineering also requested changes that resulted in a $700,000 hit to the contingency budget. The alterations included more flexible lab benches, changes to the fume hoods and the addition of a Class 10,000/1,000 cleanroom.

The College of Agriculture and Life Sciences requested revisions to an underground tunnel that connects the Plant Sciences Building and the Biotechnology Building. These changes totaled approximately $380,000.

When asked whether anything could have been done differently to avoid so many mid-stream design and construction changes, Stundtner replied, “We don’t think that’s possible for a speculative building.”

Looking Back, Lessons Learned

Process improvements Stundtner recommends include making change management explicit in the agreement with the architect, getting the administration to support key planning issues, and eliminating the middle man by interacting directly with faculty and managing all aspects of the project.

“It’s very difficult to reconstitute the design team once construction documents are done,” he says. “We need to modify our architect/engineer agreement on future projects to set time limits on responsiveness to program changes in construction.”

The major lesson learned from the LSTB project is to remember that planning for change begins with the design. Likewise, the budget has to be structured to anticipate changes because there is a great likelihood that more programs will be added at a later time.

“Select and hold your contractor accountable for managing change,” advises Stundtner. “Then, remember Murphy’s Law because there is always one more program than you planned for.”

By Tracy Carbasho

We welcome your Questions and Comments

Copyright 2008 Tradeline Inc.
All Rights Reserved
ISSN: 1096-4894