“Using a holistic approach means having a very interactive process that involves everyone with a stake in the outcome. In addition to the users, academic stakeholders, and architects, it’s important that the mechanical and electrical engineers are all involved in the process from the very start,” says Tim Reynolds, an electrical engineer and laboratory planner with The Clark Enersen Partners.

The Clark Enersen Partners architects, engineers, and planners meet on campus with everyone involved in the project to engage in an extensive analysis and programming process. By making sound strategic decisions early in the process, costly mistakes are avoided and user satisfaction is markedly increased.

“It’s important to spend the necessary time to understand all of the constraints, limitations, and requirements of the project early on, so that they can be actively incorporated into the design from the outset,” says Shawn Diederich, The Clark Enersen Partners’ director of engineering.

Discovery Process

The first step in The Clark Enersen Partners’ approach is called the discovery process. During the discovery phase, planners meet on campus with everyone involved to determine the scope of the project and the desired outcome. Goals are established for operational features and costs, and the inherent limits and constraints of the project are recognized.

“The discovery process is an educational phase where we learn about the expectations and needs of the facility, and the owner-representatives learn about architecture and engineering. It's a two-way learning process that must involve everyone—including representatives of the administration, maintenance, utility staff, and landscape personnel—so the design team understands the project’s scope,” says Diederich.

“In addition to serving as a way to gather information, the discovery process is a means for creating partnerships, building a project team, and sharing project information,” says Greg Lattig, a senior principal/architect and laboratory planner with The Clark Enersen Partners’ Science and Research Design Group.

The discovery phase proved to be critical in the addition and renovation of the University of Missouri-Columbia’s Lafferre Hall, which houses the College of Engineering. The 350,000-sf complex consists of several connected buildings with construction dates ranging from 1892 to 1991. At the time The Clark Enersen Partners were hired, University officials had already made the decision to tear down an academic support building and build another facility in its place. During the discovery phase, concerns were raised about the potential implications of the plan.

“The existing plan required no swing space, so that was a good thing. However, they were going to have to find homes for the occupants of the academic support building, which was about 10,000 square feet. It also turned out that the building shared a common wall with the utility tunnel for steam and chilled water. So, by the time we took that building down and replaced the steam tunnel, we would have spent $7 million out of a $21 million budget without any brick or mortar towards the new building,” says Lattig.

The team started looking at other options. There was a one-story wood-frame building at the center of the intended Engineering East complex. The Clark Enersen Partners planners proposed extracting the building in order to build a five-story facility in its place that would house state-of-the-art instructional laboratories, flexible research laboratories, and collaborative student spaces. Eventually, this approach was deemed to be the most advantageous and a phased master plan was adopted. Phase one—which consists of replacing the old building with the new, five-story facility—is currently underway.

“Through the discovery process there was a universal buy-in from everyone on the project team that this was the right approach to go with,” says Reynolds.

Planning and Programming

The subsequent planning and programming phase is a systematic process of information gathering that defines the specific parameters required to complete the design.

“Where discovery takes a macro view of things, planning and programming takes more of a micro view. It’s where we really start to dig into the details,” says Reynolds.

The planning and programming process was instrumental in the development of South Dakota State University’s (SDSU) new 150,000-sf science complex, which will house instructional and research facilities for the chemistry department and college of pharmacy. The scope of the project includes renovation of the existing structure to support flexible research and core facilities, and construction of a new five-story addition that will house instructional labs, classrooms, faculty offices, support areas, and interactive student spaces.

In SDSU’s existing organic chemistry labs, four students work around one eight-foot fume hood. Faculty members originally said they wanted 24 students per instructional lab in the new facility, each with their own six-foot chemical fume hood. During the planning and programming phase, the team came up with a lab design that would accommodate 24 students with 12 six-foot hoods, so that students can work in pairs around a glass-encased hood with good visibility.

Some of the tools utilized in the planning and programming phase include an extensive series of space-specific programming worksheets. A room description is provided for every usable space that defines what the room is, who uses it, what the hours of operation will be, and what the general utility requirements are. A design criteria worksheet defines what’s happening from a utility services standpoint in each space.

An equipment schedule for each room identifies the type of equipment, what it’s used for, if it is floor or bench mounted, and what the required utility services are. This not only identifies how much floor and bench space is needed, it helps the University identify what equipment is still required.

A highly detailed analysis of the existing facility is also done during the planning and programming phase of renovation projects.

“Site analysis is a very important part of renovations and additions. There are many campuses where it’s difficult to build an addition or new construction in the desired location, depending on what the existing utilities are. You have to consider whether the utilities can support an addition, or if there will be major costs associated with utility infrastructure upgrades,” says Diederich.

All in the Process

The primary benefit of using an interactive holistic approach is that it enables good decision-making early in the process which results in higher levels of satisfaction, a more efficiently utilized facility, and lower costs.

“The more emphasis you put on the early stages, the easier it is to not become frustrated during the construction process,” says Diederich.

“If you go through a very detailed process upfront and make realistic expectations of net-to-gross ratios and cost, value engineering is not going to be a painful thing that happens at the end,” says Lattig.

One of the most important lessons learned is the need to treat each project as unique.

“Every design team comes in with great experience from similar projects and their own process, but every project is unique. It’s critical that you start out with an open mind,” says Diederich.

He also emphasizes the importance of going through the process on campus in immediate proximity to the project location with the people involved so that the physical issues and constraints can be considered first-hand.

“I can’t stress enough how important it is that the process of discovery and programming occurs on campus. We very strongly believe that this is a process you cannot hurry. We are asking users to make decisions about facilities that are going to be on their campus for 50 to 100 years. They shouldn’t be expected to make those decisions in half a day or even two days. The team should be willing to spend as much time as necessary,” says Diederich.

By Johnathon Allen