To implement its vision of hosting a world-class biomedical research community, the University launched an ambitious campaign to build several new structures, including a 34,000-nsf vivarium. The move into more disease-oriented research represented a pronounced cultural shift for a campus that had neither medical, dental, nor veterinary schools and just 12,500 sf of existing animal holding rooms (AHRs). Even a year into the project definitive details on the new BioDesign Institute Building B were either limited or still in flux.

“We didn’t know how many animals would be held, what species, whether they would be small or large, or what protocols or procedures we had to provide for,” relates McGarry, director of Animal Care and Technologies at ASU since 2003.

While welcoming the opportunity to build a vivarium that would “be all things to all people,” McGarry, recognized from his previous experience in animal facility construction and management that flexibility had to be one of the highest priorities. Convertible spaces—whether for animal holding, procedures, or other functions—were an imperative. At the same time, permanent building features, ranging from floor surfaces to the location of the loading dock, had to be very carefully planned to sustain a shifting program.

Essential Decisions

An early task for the ASU planning team was sorting out fixed from flexible building features. Items in the former category, which McGarry describes as “non-negotiable,” include hard wall locations, HVAC ductwork, drains, major plumbing, lighting fixtures, layout adjacencies, hallways, major equipment, building access, and airlock-interlock configurations.

“Once you build a cinderblock wall, you can’t readily move it back and forth to accommodate something new,” he remarks.

In between the two extremes of fixed and flexible falls a third group of “potentially flexible” features, where future modifications can be incorporated into the facility without significant structural changes. In animal holding rooms, this list encompasses watering systems; HVAC volume and balance, and temperature control; lighting (intensity, color, controls, and overrides); caging; and access issues such as doors and security. Comparable decision points for procedure spaces cover power, data and voice ports, HVAC volume and balance, remote monitoring, and secure access.

Space allocations from past animal facilities McGarry had directed gave him enough historical data to devise metrics for the ratio of procedure to animal holding rooms required for various research functions. For instance, in genomics and developmental biology, which rely primarily on rodents, the guideline approximates a four-to-one ratio of holding space to procedure space, whether looking at the number of rooms or the total square footage for each. For toxicology, oncology, and physiology studies, the proportion drops by half, to roughly two to one.

“But if you have to accommodate adaptive neurosciences or behavioral studies, the mix changes considerably,” McGarry continues. “There are very few animals but lots of testing runs, mazes, swimming tubs, and the like.” In these cases, the space ratio actually reverses, with three times more real estate required for procedures than animal holding.

True Flexibility

Knowing that the facility could eventually be called upon to house everything from rodents and primates to lizards and birds, the Building B planning team embraced flexibility as its guiding principle. Then it pushed the concept to its extreme—convertibility—applying it to three levels of functionality. The result is that animal holding rooms can be adapted for different species, they can shift functions from holding to procedure space, and procedure space for one type of study can be modified to accommodate other types of research.

In actual design terms, this convertibility translates into a practice of minimal permanent furnishings and careful consideration of adjacencies and room planning.

“What’s necessary is moveable casework, tables, etc., such that the rooms, on construction, have as little built in as possible to enhance the possibility of conversion,” McGarry says.

Housing mice, rats, guinea pigs, and other small species in individually ventilated cages (IVCs) is pivotal for the sort of generic animal holding rooms envisioned. The IVC scheme also dovetails with McGarry’s strong preference for creating the requisite barrier and containment capabilities at the cage level.

“I am a staunch advocate of using microisolators for animal husbandry. It preserves the integrity of the cage and implies that cages will only be opened in a suitable environment—barrier or containment—with appropriate directional laminar air flow, depending on the application,” he explains.

The animal rooms feature thimble exhaust connections for ventilated racks. If racks are not present, air balances and temperatures can still be maintained, monitored, and controlled through the building management system, accessible via the Web. Also included are three circuits, data ports, a trench drain with hose bibb, dimmer lights, and a five-foot biosafety cabinet.

Procedure rooms are equipped with sinks and work surfaces, multiple circuits, data/voice ports, a six-foot biosafety cabinet, records room, movable storage units, lockable casework, and wall and jamb guards.

Layout

Along with a surgery suite, ABSL-3 facility, and a receiving/isolation area, the vivarium contains three blocks of animal and procedure rooms, each with limited access and a different layout to accommodate the various functions and space ratios.

One block, primarily for rodents, contains two rows of four animal rooms, separated by a service corridor down the middle, and two narrow procedure rooms stretching along the perimeters parallel to the service corridor. This configuration follows the four-to-one holding-to-procedure space guideline. It also provides two sets of doors to each animal room, another practice McGarry advocates to allow investigators and animal technicians to work simultaneously with minimal interference.

Next to but completely independent of this block is a suite that meets the standards for the Food and Drug Administration’s Good Laboratory Practices (GLPs). Manipulations are carried out in a space that is adjacent to holding rooms, but separated from the rest of the facility through a magnetically interlocked airlock. Two separate husbandry rooms permit the simultaneous study of two different species.

The third block, for behavioral studies, is arranged with a row of three animal rooms at either end. Access to the AHRs is through a generic procedure space, much like a hallway, which opens to a principal corridor in the facility. On the other side of the procedure space is a bank of smaller enclosed testing rooms dedicated to specific programs where more intensive procedures may be performed. These specialized, assignable rooms also open onto a 1,200-sf area in the center of the block, a space that confirmed the effectiveness of the flexible design by having undergone three very different iterations for deployment before the building actually came on line.

“Initially it was scheduled for the Adaptive Neurosciences group, housing computer controls and data processing space for information gathered in the testing rooms,” says McGarry. “When that faded out, we thought to convert it to a large rodent holding room, capable of containing 12 or so ventilated racks. The testing rooms were to be procedure rooms for transgenic/knockout manipulations of a functional genomics unit. The racks were to be for the breeding of founders and expansion colonies of desired genotypes. Air handling and power needs were modified to accomplish this.”

This anticipated use also did not materialize. Instead, the space was redesigned for a major electrophysiology program, with the single large room divided into individually controlled units housing testing, procedure, and other lab functions. The modifications entailed rewiring light ballasts to incorporate a sophisticated control system and coring through the floor to add heavy-duty grounding for the sophisticated electronic instrumentation. Other features include Faraday cages for animals to protect against electromagnetic interference and marble tables for delicate surgeries requiring extreme precision. The improvements were expensive—approximately $300,000, McGarry estimates—but quite feasible.

Lessons Learned

The successful electrophysiology conversion aptly illustrates McGarry’s caveat that, despite preparations, some principal investigators will never occupy the space planned for them. For this reason, he also advises retaining as much of the Fixtures, Furniture, and Equipment budget as possible after the project closes, when the unknowns will have become certainties.

Putting together the husbandry leadership team early in the project is another helpful move. This allows all involved to develop a thorough familiarity with the systems they need to commission and manage.

Information about the critical nature of the structure and the research itself also should be communicated to all members of the project team, not only to avoid any extremes in value engineering but also to quell any apprehensions about the work with animals. McGarry has gone as far as giving presentations to the contractors, subcontractors, and the people building the facility to boost their understanding of the importance of the mission and to gain their cooperation.

“Many of these people have never been in a vivarium, and they don’t know why these facilities are so demanding, even more so than hospitals,” he notes. “I have made these presentations a couple of times now, and it is amazing. All of a sudden the little details, like painted surface quality or the installation of electrical conduit, become relevant. In some ways, the builders become a part of the research effort.”

While the need to make decisions “that were not going to be reversible over the next 15 years” was a heavy burden, the project has been a very rewarding experience.

“It is expensive. It is very demanding. But I have found it to be one of the best things, frankly, that I have been involved in,” he says thoughtfully.

By Nicole Zaro Stahl