“Expect the unexpected and be flexible enough that you can work around it,” says Dr. David Richardson, dean emeritus and lead academic spokesperson for the expansion.

SMU’s 71,000-sf ASB was built in 1967 with two floors. Three floors were added in 1969. The building houses the departments of biology, chemistry, geology, and environmental and forensic science. By 1990, renovation or replacement was clearly necessary, according to Richardson. Air handling systems and fume hoods were inefficient, as were electrical and plumbing systems. Computer connections were problematic. Windows and walls leaked. Faculty required more teaching and research space. The building contained asbestos, too, although most of it was removed in 1986.

The University, always operating on a shoestring budget, carefully considered its options. Two were dismissed mainly due to cost: demolishing the building and constructing a new one; or putting additions on both sides and renovating the existing building. A third option, renovating the existing building and adding a 20,000-sf extension, fell within the target $15 million budget. Grant funding from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation for construction of an astrophysics laboratory gave a boost to the third option.

Once the idea of a new building was ruled out, SMU had little choice but to work on the existing building while using it, says Richardson. Classes and research labs still had to be conducted from September to April, and there was nowhere else to move them.

“Unless you’re going to build a brand new building and relocate people during the summer, your only option is to keep the teaching labs going, and the same for people’s research,” he explains. “People have to be provided with some sort of space. That’s where the difficulty comes.”

Although construction started in April 2006, careful pre-planning began a full year ahead, by necessity.

After touring the facility and noting its needs, the project team gathered “wish lists” from the building occupants. The project principals also visited nearby University of Prince Edward Island to view a similar project that had been done to a biology building. The need to minimize dust and noise were two aspects SMU took away from the visit.

Once project architects were chosen, they became part of a committee that included senior university officials and lead academics. The committee met weekly to review wish lists and determine what would fit in the expanded space.

“Always people’s wish lists are more than you could possibly afford,” says Richardson. “There had to be some pruning back. You have to come up with guidelines to put people’s wishes into a reasonable context.”

The committee decided that each PI would have a 500-sf lab and a 130-sf office. They then consulted with the architects to determine how to accommodate everything that was requested.

“We had to be flexible, so most people got more than those minimums,” says Richardson. “We developed an interactive procedure between the architects, myself, and the people in the building.”

During planning, SMU’s team also looked at how “green” they could afford to make the building. They examined a dozen possibilities, from geothermal heating to low-flow washrooms.

“Sometimes it’s just too complicated or too expensive,” says Richardson.  “So we looked at each of these things and the cost benefit.”

Geothermal heating and green roofs were ruled out, but everything in the building that could be made energy efficient, such as  recycling cooling water and heat exchange for fume hood exhausts as well as lighting, windows, insulation, and air handling, were all incorporated into the renovation. Wireless communication was planned for each floor in areas where students can interact and exchange ideas informally.

Then logistical planning began. A key player throughout the planning and construction was a project manager hired by SMU, who called himself the “coach.” The coach had experience with other university building projects. He served as the day-to-day point person for all parties involved.

“We found he played a very valuable role,” explains Richardson. “Essentially the coach is like a coach of a hockey team. He solves the problems between the players - that is, the construction people and the students and the academics and the administration. It works very well.”

Planning how to move everyone took a lot of time, says Richardson. The first year of the project, the moving plan underwent 10 revisions. This year, they whittled it down to about five iterations, having learned from their phase one and two experiences, he adds.

“The moving plan has to be revised,” he says. “You suddenly find that you’ve planned something and maybe it doesn’t quite work or you need that space for something else…it’s fairly complicated.”

The planning committee decided at a very early stage that lectures would be moved to other buildings so hoards of students wouldn’t be in and out on an hourly basis. Labs were scheduled mainly in the afternoons and evenings so they wouldn’t interfere with the morning construction work.

The committee quickly realized a floor-by-floor renovation wouldn’t be possible, either. The building’s asbestos was along vertical shafts, and had to be cleared top to bottom. Second, it was easier to move equipment side to side. They decided on an east/west split.

“We did the east side of the building the first summer, and this summer we are doing the west side of the building,” says Richardson.

For storage, SMU secured a parking garage under one of its other buildings. The final thing was finding space in other parts of the University to accommodate personnel during the summer who had to move out. The major part of the renovation started in early April and went over the summer.

Communication, Cooperation are Critical

The moving required cooperation.

“The first thing, of course, is that you have to develop good relations with the occupants of the building,” says Richardson. “Then we had to establish teams for clearing the labs. What we did was to employ teams of students under the direction of technicians to pack all the equipment.” Commercial movers did the rest. Faculty members were responsible for packing their own offices. They were given deadlines and student help. The moving plan told everybody where they were going and when.

Despite the University’s thorough planning, there have been delays. Asbestos removal caused a major delay in summer 2006.

“Using the best technology, initially they thought they could do it in a week per floor,” says Richardson. “It took about a month per floor.”

New teaching labs were finished five weeks late. Research was disrupted, especially for the chemists. This year, a problem with the ducts caused delays. Odd design features where the old and new portions of the original building were joined meant more work as well.

“These little complications put you behind in timing,” he says.

Richardson believes SMU could have kept staff better informed of the weekly schedule during the project’s first year. They offered freebies for students like water bottles labeled “extreme science makeover” but should have acknowledged the other building inhabitants more. SMU has tried to rectify things this year. A staff barbeque was held recently to help relieve stress. Periodic “town hall” sessions are held to review what’s happened and what will happen.

Involvement of senior administration is important, says Richardson.

“I think it is effective to have those people come along at the end of a stage or a phase and say ‘well done,’” he says.

It’s also important to keep people focused on the outcome, so they realize the inconveniences will be well worth the hassles. When completed, the extension to SMU’s science building will contain, in addition to research laboratories on each floor, a new organic chemistry teaching laboratory with four 6-foot fume hoods and 32 bench-top extraction hoods; a 3-D seismic computer teaching lab for oil/gas exploration; 36-seat microbiology teaching laboratory; and new suite for the dean of science with science seminar / meeting room as well as offices for the secretary and the undergraduate program officer. Finally, the first floor of the extension will contain the ACENET astrophysics visualization laboratory and an audio-visual, multi-site communication center funded by the Canadian Foundation for Innovation.

In the renovated part of the building, the old lecture rooms have been replaced by teaching or research labs and every faculty member now has an office and adjacent lab. Part-time faculty and graduate students have offices as well. The building now has wireless and wired communications for computers in addition to the student hotspots on every floor.

On the first floor, the renovation provides a new ecology teaching lab with hexagonal moveable tables. The second floor has an updated computer-linked chemistry lab where students still do hands-on chemistry but the results are fed to computers to simulate what happens in an industrial setting. The third floor houses a new physiology teaching lab and a taxonomy research lab for identifying a wide range of organisms. The fourth floor has an enlarged first-year geology teaching laboratory. The fifth floor houses a new, enlarged inorganic chemistry laboratory with four 6-foot fume hoods as well as a renovated center for environmental analysis and remediation. A wide range of analytical equipment is contained in this center and elsewhere on this floor.

Lastly, when taking on a project of this scope, define who is responsible for checking that deficiencies are remedied before it’s too late, Richardson advises.

“Yes, it is possible to renovate a building as it is occupied, but don’t do it unless it’s the only option you have,” concludes Richardson.

At this point, SMU’s project is back on budget and completion is a few months delayed. The renovated teaching labs were finished by mid-September, two weeks behind schedule. The offices and other remaining work are expected to be finished by December, about three months late. The overall cost is $25 million, of which $16.5 million was for the construction, renovation, and extension.

By Taitia Shelow

We welcome your Questions and Comments

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