“As the cost of materials and construction goes up, renovation becomes more attractive. In addition to the potential cost savings, reusing an old building is probably one of the most environmentally sustainable things you can do. There is a tremendous amount of  embodied energy in an existing facility. If you can save the materials and resources that have already been put into a building and make something useful out of it, that is a very good thing,” says Jeff Murray, a design principal with IDC Architects in Pittsburgh.

Renovation can also be the preferred option when dealing with culturally and historically significant buildings common at universities and large technology companies.

“Tradition is a frequently cited issue when it comes to recruiting students and researchers. People want to go to institutions with historical significance and a lot of that has to do with the buildings. There is no way to replace culturally and artistically unique buildings,” he says.

Murray also points out that buildings evolve and, if properly designed and maintained, improve over time. Though renovation can be the preferred option for upgrading lab facilities, it also comes with inherent challenges. The process of new construction pre-design consists primarily of needs assessment. For renovation projects, the requisite needs assessment must also be coupled with an existing facility assessment to establish an understanding of existing conditions as well as future needs. Renovation projects also require more stages of design approval, including demolition and removal documentation, repair and reuse documentation, and temporary construction phasing that impacts operations.

To maximize renovation investments, IDC Architects has developed an integrated set of assessment and design tools for determining the upgrade potential of existing buildings.

System and Spatial Assessment

One of the first things to consider when upgrading a facility are the tangible assets of the building—systems, such as structure, air distribution, and building envelope—and the organization of its space, according to Murray.

“Spatial organization, the intangible asset, is the heart of the building. You can replace systems, but if you can’t make the spaces work together in some creative way, then it isn’t going to be very useful,” he says.

A team of engineers, architects, researchers, and technology experts assesses the existing distribution of services, mechanical space, office and lab space, circulation, and work activity. An important part of the analysis is looking at the condition of the building envelope to understand its existing performance values and establish what needs to be done to ensure it can house specialized functions. Vibration analysis is conducted, mechanical systems are assessed, and fire protection and accessibility are all considered.

“This is an important process when you are putting new mechanical systems in an older facility. If the building envelope leaks, or if it doesn’t have good thermal performance, then the mechanical systems are never going to work right,” says Murray.

The collected information, consisting of thousands of comments on every aspect of the facility’s functionality, is entered into a building database with corresponding program and cost modules that establish a dollar value for each element based on industry benchmarks.

“The assessment database allows us to generate cost information in a quick snapshot kind of way using valid information that is based on good benchmarking,” he says.

Planning in 3D

Another important tool in the needs assessment process is the use of 3D modeling programs that allow facility planners to conceptualize a building’s spatial elements in relation to planning. Using Google’s SketchUp and AutoDesk’s Revit, the team creates detailed models of the existing facilities in order to explore potential design solutions.

“While conventionally one team does the conceptual design and another team conducts the existing facility assessment, we’ve found that a highly useful feedback loop is created when the two activities are integrated and can inform each other throughout the process,” says Murray.

Filling in the Gaps

The facility assessment and the needs assessment are comparatively analyzed to create what is known as a “Gap Analysis.” The Gap Analysis compares actual facility performance with the desired performance.

“Once we have established where the gaps are, we can use the modeling tools to explore different ideas about how to move forward. We can look at what happens if you put ductwork on the outside of the building, if you add a floor, or if you tear everything out and create high bay space. We can put realistic numbers on every one of those,” says Murray.

Potentiality Meets Reality

While many redesign challenges can be overcome in the assessment and planning process, sometimes the process can also help determine when a building should not be renovated.

“Of course, not every building is worth renovating, but it is always worth considering in the process of making those decisions. The primary question is: What is the facility’s potential for research?” says Murray.

Among the considerations that can impact a decision to renovate is the ability of the existing structure to accommodate all necessary equipment and support services.

“Not only do you need to find the space for equipment, you need to make sure you can get the equipment in and out of the building and be able to service it,” says Murray.

Floor-to-floor height is also critical to the functionality of a modern research lab.

“There are a lot of creative things you can do with an existing building, but if you don’t have enough floor-to-floor height, you really shouldn’t turn it into a lab,” he says. “However, sometimes that is the only option a client has.”

In situations where the floor height is limited and the building is not of historic or cultural significance, an external distribution system can be implemented and the façade upgraded. In this situation, duct space is added to the outside of the building envelope in order to deliver lab support services throughout.

“One of the advantages of external services is that you can upgrade the infrastructure by creating an exoskeleton for system distribution without disturbing the work going on inside.  Then go through the building in phases to do the renovation,” says Murray.

Assessment Modeling in Action

Conducting a Gap Analysis can reveal ways to improve a facility through relatively simple measures such as reorganizing traffic flow and spatial organization. When a large eastern university asked IDC Architects to analyze five buildings in the center of its campus for a possible upgrade, the assessment team determined that the separate structures—two of which were architecturally and historically significant—were better treated as a single campus complex.

“We developed a plan where the three most structurally robust buildings would become lab facilities and the two buildings with historical significance would be used for classroom and office space in order to avoid having to alter them mechanically,” says Murray.

Because the university also wanted to increase researcher interaction, the offices were organized into groups and moved out of the labs. In order to make circulation between labs and offices work, a few small additions were included to improve the greater traffic flow—resulting in an approximately 20 percent increase of utilized space.

“In that case, the lab, support, office, and teaching spaces were all increased simply by creating a large comprehensive plan and organizing it properly,” says Murray.

Tools to Build On

A collaborative, integrated approach to assessment and modeling gives facility planners and researchers alike useful tools for developing functional solutions at lower costs.

The process proved essential when one of IDC Architect’s clients wanted to transform a former manufacturing facility into research labs. Near the end of the process, the client’s recently appointed project manager challenged the popular renovation plan and advocated building a new lab tower.

“It was clearly a bargain for them to renovate the existing building as opposed to building a new one and, because all of the researchers had been involved in the assessment and 3D modeling process from day one, they were able to say: ‘No, we don’t want a lab tower because this is cheaper and it will satisfy all of our needs. The renovation is unique and it has already helped us recruit one new researcher.’ They had the numbers for how much it would cost to knock down the existing facility and build a new lab tower, and those differences were significant in both time and money,” says Murray.

By Johnathon Allen

We welcome your Questions and Comments

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